It was an audacious claim in an effort to get out of a parking ticket. But The Canberra Times reported on this day 44 years ago that a Canberra barrister argued ordinances made to apply in the ACT had no effect within Canberra City.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
Press gallery journalist Mr P. R. J. Rees was convicted in a Canberra Petty Sessions hearing of a parking infringement, but no conviction was recorded at the discretion of the magistrate. However, this did not stop the appeal.
Barrister P. L. R. Sheils argued before a full bench of the ACT Supreme Court that the seat of government and the ACT were two separate entities and the seat of government included the city of Canberra.
The constitutional power to make laws over the seat of government had been delegated to the interior minister, meaning ordinances made to apply to the ACT did not apply specifically in Canberra City, "the capital city of Canberra", the seat of government.
Justice Fox said: "You would have to go to the High Court and beyond, I would think ... to get any agreement with a submission that the ordinances of the territory do not apply to the seat of government".
Jasper Lindell
Jasper Lindell joined The Canberra Times in 2018. He is a Legislative Assembly reporter, covering ACT politics and government. He also writes about development, transport, heritage, local history, literature and the arts, as well as contributing to the Times' Panorama magazine. He was previously a Sunday Canberra Times reporter.
Jasper Lindell joined The Canberra Times in 2018. He is a Legislative Assembly reporter, covering ACT politics and government. He also writes about development, transport, heritage, local history, literature and the arts, as well as contributing to the Times' Panorama magazine. He was previously a Sunday Canberra Times reporter.
