Adelaide Company of Jehovah's Witnesses v Commonwealth

Infobox Court Case
name=Adelaide Company of Jehovah's Witnesses v Commonwealth
court=High Court of Australia


date_decided=June 14 1943
full_name=Adelaide Company of Jehovah's Witnesses Inc v The Commonwealth of Australia
citations= [http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/high_ct/67clr116.html (1943) 67 CLR 116] , [http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/1943/12.html 1943 HCA 12]
judges=Latham CJ, Rich, Starke, McTiernan & Williams JJ
prior_actions=none
subsequent_actions=none
opinions=(5:0) the "National Security (Subversive Associations) Regulations" did not contravene section 116 of the Australian Constitution (per curiam)(5:0) the power under the regulations to seize any building containing property connected to a subversive association was beyond the Commonwealth's defence powers under s51(vi) of the Constitution (per curiam)

Adelaide Company of Jehovah's Witnesses Inc v Commonwealth (also known as the Jehovah's Witnesses case) was an important court case decided in the High Court of Australia on June 14 1943.

In January 1941, acting pursuant to the National Security (Subversive Organisations) Regulations 1940, the Commonwealth Government declared the Jehovah's Witnesses to be 'prejudicial to the defence of the Commonwealth' and to the 'efficient prosecution of the war'. Police immediately occupied premises of the organisation.

In September 1941, the Jehovah's Witnesses applied to the High Court for an injunction to restrain the Commonwealth from further trespassing on their premises, and seeking damages.

The Jehovah's Witnesses argued that the regulations contravened the express constitutional protections for freedom from religious discrimination which they said was contained in section 116 of the Constitution, which provides that:"The Commonwealth shall not make any law for establishing any religion, or for imposing any religious observance, or for prohibiting the free exercise of any religion, and no religious test shall be required as a qualification for any office or public trust under the Commonwealth".

This was only the second case to consider section 116. The first had been Krygger v Williams (1912). In that case, the protections afforded by section 116 had been defined very narrowly.

The Court unanimously held that the National Security (Subversive Organisations) Regulations 1940 did not infringe against section 116.

Despite these findings on section 116, the Jehovah's Witnesses were ultimately successful in their challenge to the regulations, on the ground that they exceeded the scope of the Commonwealth's defence power in section 51(vi) of the Constitution.

ee also

* Australian constitutional law

External links

[http://cchasson.free.fr/deposit/trial/Adelaide%20Company%20of%20Jehovah's%20Witnesses%20Inc%20V%20The%20Commonwealth%20of%20Australia..pdf "Adelaide Company of Jehovah's Witnesses, Inc. v. The Commonwealth of Australia"] --Documents from the Australian governmental archive