The ACT Court of Appeal has held that the obligation under s 30 of the Human Rights Act 2004 (ACT) to interpret laws compatibly with human rights may be engaged even where the words of a statute are clear and there is no ambiguity. In particular, the Court held that a requirement that leave to appeal certain decisions only be granted where ‘substantial injustice’ would otherwise occur was potentially incompatible with the positive right to a fair trial under s 21 of the HRA. The Court considered that it may be necessary to ‘modify’ the reference to ‘substantial injustice’ as ‘something less than a substantial injustice may well result in an unfair trial’.
Detailed case note.
Found in 2008, Australia, Other Australian Court or Tribunal, s32 - Interpretation, Select International and Comparative Caselaw
