| ||||||||||||||||||||||
It is proposed to alter the Constitution so as to provide for retiring ages for judges of federal courts. Do you approve of the proposed law? | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Results | ||||||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
The Constitution Alteration (Retirement of Judges) Bill 1977 was a successful proposal to alter the Australian Constitution to introduce a retirement age of 70 for federal judges. [1] It was put to voters for approval in a referendum held on 21 May 1977. After being approved in the referendum, it received the royal assent and became law on 29 July 1977. [2]
As of 2023 it is the most recent referendum in Australia that has led to the successful modification of the Constitution.
It is proposed to alter the Constitution so as to provide for retiring ages for judges of federal courts.
Do you approve the proposed law?
The proposal was to add the following paragraphs at the end of section 72.
State | Electoral roll | Ballots issued | For | Against | Informal | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Vote | % | Vote | % | |||||
New South Wales | 3,007,511 | 2,774,388 | 2,316,999 | 84.84 | 414,070 | 15.16 | 43,319 | |
Victoria | 2,252,831 | 2,083,136 | 1,659,273 | 81.43 | 378,505 | 18.57 | 45,358 | |
Queensland | 1,241,426 | 1,138,842 | 734,183 | 65.24 | 391,227 | 34.76 | 13,432 | |
South Australia | 799,243 | 745,990 | 622,760 | 85.57 | 104,987 | 14.43 | 18,243 | |
Western Australia | 682,291 | 617,463 | 472,228 | 78.37 | 130,307 | 21.63 | 14,928 | |
Tasmania | 259,081 | 246,063 | 174,951 | 72.46 | 66,478 | 27.54 | 4,634 | |
Total for Commonwealth | 8,242,383 | 7,605,882 | 5,980,394 | 80.10 | 1,485,574 | 19.90 | 139,914 | |
Results | Obtained majority in all six States and an overall majority of 4,494,820 votes.Carried |
In October 1976 the Senate Standing Committee on Constitutional and Legal Affairs recommended a retiring age for all federal judges. This recommendation was based on
The committee's view was accepted by the Australian Constitutional Convention soon thereafter.
The amendment introduced in the following year sought to provide for a retiring age of 70 for all federal court judges, including those on the High Court. The issue was not controversial, despite Sir Robert Menzies' description of the change as 'superficial and ill-considered'. Over 80 per cent of voters supported the amendment.
The amendment applied prospectively, meaning the tenure of those High Court and Federal judges appointed prior to the referendum were unaffected. Of the serving High Court judges, only Sir Garfield Barwick made use of his original tenure, retiring in 1981 at the age of 77. The remaining judges either retired, resigned, or died, with the exception of Sir Harry Gibbs and Sir Anthony Mason, who were appointed Chief Justice and thus lost their right to the original life tenure. Several Federal judges made use of their original tenure, with judges of the Australian Industrial Court Sir Percy Joske retiring on 31 December 1977 aged 82, [5] and Edward Dunphy retiring on 31 December 1982 aged 75. Five Federal Court judges did not retire at age 70, Sir Nigel Bowen (1990), aged 79, Sir John Nimmo (1980) aged 71, Sir Reginald Smithers (1986) aged 83, Charles Sweeney (1995) aged 80 and Ray Northrop (1998) aged 73.
The High Court of Australia is the apex court of the Australian legal system. It exercises original and appellate jurisdiction on matters specified in the Constitution of Australia and supplementary legislation.
The chief justice of India is the highest-ranking officer of the Indian judiciary and the chief judge of the Supreme Court of India. The Constitution of India grants power to the President of India to appoint, as recommended by outgoing chief justice in consultation with other judges as envisaged in Article 124 (2) of the Constitution, the next chief justice, who will serve until they reach the age of 65 or are removed by the constitutional process of impeachment.
Sir Harry Talbot Gibbs was Chief Justice of the High Court of Australia from 1981 to 1987 after serving as a member of the High Court between 1970 and 1981. He was known as one of Australia's leading federalist judges although he presided over the High Court when decisions such as Koowarta v Bjelke-Petersen in 1982 and Commonwealth v Tasmania expanded the powers of the Commonwealth at the expense of the states. Gibbs dissented from the majority verdict in both cases. On 3 August 2012, the Supreme Court of Queensland Library opened the Sir Harry Gibbs Legal Heritage Centre. It is the only legal heritage museum of its kind in Queensland and features a permanent exhibition dedicated to the life and legacy of Sir Harry Gibbs.
The second question of the 1967 Australian referendum of 27 May 1967, called by the Holt government, related to Indigenous Australians. Voters were asked whether to give the Commonwealth Parliament the power to make special laws for Indigenous Australians in states, and whether Indigenous Australians should be included in official population counts for constitutional purposes. The term "the Aboriginal Race" was used in the question.
The Constitution Alteration Bill 1977, was a successful proposal to alter the Australian Constitution concerning the filling of casual vacancies in the Senate. It was put to voters for approval in a referendum held on 21 May 1977. After being approved in the referendum, it received the royal assent and became law on 29 July 1977.
Sir Edward Aloysius McTiernan, KBE, was an Australian lawyer, politician, and judge. He served on the High Court of Australia from 1930 to 1976, the longest-serving judge in the court's history.
The Inter-State Commission, or Interstate Commission, is a defunct constitutional body under Australian law. The envisaged chief functions of the Inter-State Commission were to administer and adjudicate matters relating to interstate trade. The Commission was established in 1912, became dormant in 1920, was abolished in 1950, re-established in 1983, and absorbed into the Industry Commission in 1989.
In Australian constitutional law, chapter III courts are courts of law which are a part of the Australian federal judiciary and thus are able to discharge Commonwealth judicial power. They are so named because the prescribed features of these courts are contained in chapter III of the Australian Constitution.
The Fifth Amendment to the Constitution of Pakistan was adopted on September 5, 1976, by the elected Parliament of Pakistan under the democratic government of Zulfikar Ali Bhutto.
The judicial officers of the Republic of Singapore work in the Supreme Court and the State Courts to hear and determine disputes between litigants in civil cases and, in criminal matters, to determine the liability of accused persons and their sentences if they are convicted.
The Constitution of Australia is the fundamental law that governs the political structure of Australia. It is a written constitution, that establishes the country as a federation under a constitutional monarchy governed with a parliamentary system. Its eight chapters sets down the structure and powers of the three constituent parts of the federal level of government: the Parliament, the executive government and the judicature.
The chief justice of the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka is the head of the judiciary of Sri Lanka and the Supreme Court of Sri Lanka. Established in 1801, the chief justice is one of ten Supreme Court justices; the other nine are the puisne justices of the Supreme Court of Sri Lanka. The post was created in 1801. The chief justice is nominated by the Constitutional Council, and appointed by the president. The first chief justice was Codrington Edmund Carrington. The 47th and current chief justice is Jayantha Jayasuriya.
The chief justice of Australia is the presiding justice of the High Court of Australia and the highest-ranking judicial officer in the Commonwealth of Australia. The incumbent is Stephen Gageler, since 6 November 2023.
The principles of the current Constitution of South Australia, also known as the South Australian Constitution, which includes the rules and procedures for the government of the State of South Australia, are set out in the Constitution Act 1934. Its long title is "An Act to provide for the Constitution of the State; and for other purposes".
The Constitution of Barbados is the supreme law under which Barbados is governed. The Constitution provides a legal establishment of the Government of Barbados, as well as legal rights and responsibilities of the public and various other government officers. The Constitution which came into force in 1966 was amended in 1974, 1980, 1981, 1985, 1989, 1990, 1992, 1995, 2000, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2007, 2009, 2010, 2018, 2019, 2020 and 2021. The 1966 document succeeds several other documents concerning administration of Barbados. One of them, the Barbados Charter, is discussed in the present Constitution's Preamble. Prior statutes were created for the administration of Barbados as a colony. As a former English and later British colony, the Constitution is similar to those of other former Commonwealth realms, yet distinctly different in the spirit of the Statute of Westminster.
The Twelfth Amendment to the Constitution of Pakistan was passed by the Parliament on 28 July 1991. The bill established Special Courts for the trial of heinous offenses. It also raised the salaries of the judges of the Supreme Court and the High Courts.
Waterside Workers' Federation of Australia v J W Alexander Ltd is a landmark Australian judgment of the High Court made in 1918 regarding judicial power of the Commonwealth which established that Chapter III of the Constitution required judges to be appointed for life to a specific court, subject only to the removal provisions in the constitution. The majority of the High Court held that because the President of the Commonwealth Court of Conciliation and Arbitration was appointed for seven years and not life as required by s 72 of the Constitution, the Arbitration Court could not exercise judicial powers of the Commonwealth.
The Commonwealth Industrial Court, known as the Australian Industrial Court from 1973, was a specialist court to deal with industrial matters, principally the enforcement of awards and orders of the Commonwealth Conciliation and Arbitration Commission. Over time it took on more matters and its judges were allocated a wide range of judicial tasks until it was replaced in 1977 by the Federal Court of Australia which had a more general jurisdiction covering matters arising under Australian federal law.
Section 99 of the Constitution Act, 1867 is a provision of the Constitution of Canada relating to the tenure and retirement age of the provincial superior court judges in Canada.