Attorney-General (Tas) v Casimaty

Statutes – Construction – Statutory consequence of non-compliance with statutory condition of exercise of power – Where s 16(1) of Public Works Committee Act 1914 (Tas) ("Act") stipulates conditions precedent to commencement of public work proposed to be undertaken by Tasmanian Government department or State authority – Conditions precedent that public work referred to and reported upon by Parliamentary Standing Committee on Public Works ("Committee") – Where Tasmanian Government Department of State Growth proposed new interchange be constructed – Where proposal referred to and reported upon by Committee – Where person with claimed interest in adjacent land brought proceeding against construction company in Supreme Court of Tasmania alleging commencement of road work contravened s 16(1) of Act as different from proposal referred to and reported upon by Committee – Where Attorney-General for Tasmania joined as defendant to proceeding – Where Attorney-General sought order that statement of claim be struck out or proceeding be dismissed because statement of claim failed to disclose cause of action in that no justiciable issue before Court or because adjudication by Court would contravene privilege of Tasmanian Parliament – Whether observance of conditions precedent to commencement of public work stipulated by s 16(1) of Act an obligation enforceable by a court.

Words and phrases – "conditions precedent", "duty", "exclusive cognisance of Parliament", "impeached or questioned", "intra-mural", "justiciable controversy", "non-compliance", "non-justiciable", "parliamentary privilege", "political accountability", "public obligation", "public work", "public works committee", "referred to and reported upon by", "responsible government".

Bill of Rights 1688 (1 W & M sess 2 c 2) – Art 9.

Public Works Committee Act 1914 (Tas) – ss 15, 16, 17.