Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-544b6db54f-s4m2s Total loading time: 0.379 Render date: 2021-10-20T08:23:59.136Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "metricsAbstractViews": false, "figures": true, "newCiteModal": false, "newCitedByModal": true, "newEcommerce": true, "newUsageEvents": true }

Chapter 5 - Removal, suspension and discipline of judges

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 December 2012

Enid Campbell
Affiliation:
Monash University, Victoria
H. P. Lee
Affiliation:
Monash University, Victoria
Get access

Summary

Removal of judges

Historically, judges appointed by the English monarch held office at the pleasure of the Crown (durante bene placito). Thus, it was possible for judges to be dismissed peremptorily and without cause. The struggle between the English Parliament and the Crown, which ultimately led to the subjugation of the latter to the former, also led to the advancement of judicial independence. Judicial independence of the Crown was eventually secured by Article III, s 7 of the Act of Settlement 1701 (Eng), which provided as follows:

The judges’ commissions be made quamdiu se bene gesserint [during good behaviour] and their salaries ascertained and established; but upon the address of both Houses of Parliament it may be lawful to remove them.

At the federal level, judicial independence was given constitutional protection in s 72(ii) of the Commonwealth Constitution. This provides that federal judges (that is, Justices of the High Court and judges of the other courts created by the Commonwealth Parliament) ‘[s]hall not be removed except by the Governor-General in Council, on an address from both Houses of Parliament in the same session, praying for such removal on the ground of proved misbehaviour or incapacity’. In the case of South Australia, Western Australia and Tasmania, it is simply provided that it would be lawful to remove judges of the Supreme Court upon the address of both Houses of Parliament, although the Supreme Court judges in South Australia and Western Australia are stated by a separate provision to hold and remain in office ‘during good behaviour’. The grounds of ‘proved misbehaviour’ or ‘incapacity’ are expressly specified in New South Wales, Queensland, Victoria, the Northern Territory and the Australian Capital Territory.

The standard mode of removal is an address of both Houses of Parliament in New South Wales, South Australia, Victoria and Western Australia, or an address of the Legislative Assembly in Queensland (the only State with a bicameral parliament), the Northern Territory and the Australian Capital Territory. In addition, Victoria, Queensland and the Australian Capital Territory all provide for the convening of ad hoc bodies where an allegation of misbehaviour or incapacity has been made to the designated authority. These bodies are tasked with determining whether on the facts the misbehaviour or incapacity of the judge warrants his or her removal as a step prior to an address in Parliament to remove the judge.

Type
Chapter
Information
The Australian Judiciary , pp. 116 - 151
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2012

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Plucknett, T F TTaswell-Langmead’s English Constitutional HistorySweet and Maxwell 1960 465
Lindell, GThe Murphy Affair in RetrospectLee, H PWinterton, GAustralian Constitutional LandmarksCambridge University Press 2003 280CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thomas, J BJudicial Ethics in AustraliaLexisNexis Butterworths 2009 220Google Scholar
Lee, H PMorabito, VRemoval of Judges – The Australian Experience 1992 Singapore Journal of Legal Studies 40Google Scholar
Wilkinson, MBig Shots BuggedNational TimesSydney 1983Google Scholar
1984
1985
1986
Dickie, PThe Road to Fitzgerald and BeyondUniversity of Queensland Press 1989 328Google Scholar
1989
Queensland, Parliamentary Judges Commission of Inquiry 1989
1984
Parliamentary Commission of Inquiry Re The Honourable Mr Justice Murphy 1986 2 Australian Bar Review203
Di Lallo, TPersonal Liability for Costs 1999 73 Law Institute Journal48Google Scholar
Ross, ILawyers’ Tactics – New Ethics 2000 74 Law Institute Journal37Google Scholar
Blackshield, A RThe Appointment and Removal of Federal JudgesOpeskin, BWheeler, FThe Australian Federal Judicial SystemMelbourne University Press 2000 425Google Scholar
1998
Waugh, JA Question of Capacity: The Case of Justice Bruce 1998 9 Public Law Review223Google Scholar
Beaumont, BContemporary Judgment Writing: The Problem Restated 1999 73 Australian Law Journal743Google Scholar
1998
Campbell, ESuspension of Judges from Office 1999 18 Australian Bar Review63Google Scholar
Priest, JSir Harry Gibbs: Without Fear or FavourScribblers Publishing 1995 111Google Scholar
1986
1986
Atkinson, RThe Chief Justice and Mr Justice Murphy: Leadership in a Time of Crisis 2008 27 The University of Queensland Law Journal221Google Scholar
2009
Kirby, MJudicial Independence Reaches a Moment of Truth 1990 13 University of New South Wales Law Journal187Google Scholar
The Removal of Justice Staples: Contrived Nonsense or Matter of Principle? 1990 6 Australian Bar Review1
Abolition of Courts and Non-reappointment of Judicial Officers 1995 12 Australian Bar Review181
Campbell, EJudicial Review of Proceedings for Removal of Judges from Office 1999 22 University of New South Wales Law Journal325Google Scholar
1997
Griffiths, GParliamentary Privilege: Use, Misuse and Proposals for ReformNSW Parliamentary Library Research Service 1997 24Google Scholar
1998
The Ronald Wilson Lecture 1994Abolition of Courts and Non-reappointment of Judicial Officers 1995 12 Australian Bar Review181Google Scholar
Connolly, TRelations Between the Judicial and Executive Branches of Government 1997 6 Journal of Judicial Administration215Google Scholar
1987
1990
Kirby, MAbolition of Courts and Non-reappointment of Judicial Officers 1995 12 Australian Bar Review181Google Scholar
Kirby, Judicial Independence and Justice Staples 1989 Victorian Bar News19Google Scholar
1990 9
1993
1996 4
1993
Judicial Independence 1997 16 Australian Bar Review212
Gibbs, HThe Appointment and Removal of Judges 1987 17 Federal Law Review141Google Scholar
1988
King, L JRemoval of Judges 2003 6 The Flinders Journal of Law Reform169Google Scholar
New Formalised Judicial Accountability System Established in New South Wales 1987 61 Australian Law Journal157
Shetreet, SThe limits of judicial accountability: A hard look at the Judicial Officers Act 1986 1987 10 University of New South Wales Law Journal4Google Scholar
Spigelman, J JDealing with Judicial Misconduct 2003 6 The Judicial Review241Google Scholar
McClelland, MDisciplining Australian Judges 1990 64 Australian Law Journal388Google Scholar
Australian Judicial System Advisory Committee 1987
Gibbs, HWho Judges the Judges? 1987 61 Law Institute Journal814Google Scholar
Mason, AThe State of the Australian Judicature 1987 61 Australian Law Journal681Google Scholar
Rozzoli, KParliament and Judicial Accountability: Time for an Overhaul 2000 15 Legislative Studies42Google Scholar
Annual Report of the New South Wales Judicial Commission 2012 86 Australian Law Journal79
McGarvie, R EThe Operation of the New Proposals in AustraliaThe Accountability of the Australian Judiciary: Procedures for Dealing with Complaints Concerning Judicial OfficersAustralasian Institute of Judicial Administration 1989 38Google Scholar
2009
Karamicov, DJudicial Complaints and the Complaints Procedure: Is it Time for an Independent Judicial Commission in Victoria? 2010 19 Journal of Judicial Administration232Google Scholar
2011
2012
Australian Judicial System Advisory Committee 1987
Australian Law Reform Commission 2000
Department of Justice, Victoria 2009
Senate Legal and Constitutional Affairs References CommitteeInquiry into Australia’s Judicial System and the Role of JudgesAPH 2009 93Google Scholar

Send book to Kindle

To send this book to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Send book to Dropbox

To send content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Send book to Google Drive

To send content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×