Federal Court (Full Court). In order to make out the statutory grounds of review specified in s 5 of the ADJR Act, was it necessary for the judicial review applicant to show that any errors were jurisdictional? In relation to the exercise of the discretion under s 16 of the ADJR Act as to whether to grant relief, is there a like standard of “reasonable conjecture” to that which informs whether an error is jurisdictional?
Some of the questions to the Full Court of the Federal Court (FCAFC) were as follows:
Question 1: In order to make out the statutory grounds of review specified in s 5 of the ADJR Act, was it necessary for the judicial review applicant to show that any errors were jurisdictional?
Question 2: If the answer to Question 1 is 'yes', would it nevertheless fall to the Court to determine whether, as a matter of discretion, relief by the making of an order pursuant to s 16 of the ADJR Act should be granted?
Question 3: In relation to the exercise of the discretion under s 16 of the ADJR Act as to whether to grant relief, is there a like standard of “reasonable conjecture” to that which informs whether an error is jurisdictional?
Question 4: If the answer to Question 3 is 'yes', is that standard similarly undemanding?
The FCAFC answered those questions as follows: