Sue v Hill

Sue v Hill
Court	High Court of Australia
Full case name	Sue v Hill & Anor; Sharples v Hill & Anor
Decided	23 June 1999
Citations	[1999] HCA 30, (1999) 199 CLR 462.
Court membership
Judges sitting	Gleeson (Chief Justice), Gaudron, McHugh, Gummow, Kirby, Hayne & Callinan (Justices)
Case opinions
(4:3)That the High Court of Australia (sitting as the Court of Disputed Claims) had Jurisdiction over the case.[1][2] Assent: Gleeson (CJ), Gaudron, Gummow & Hayne (J) [1] Dissent: McHugh, Kirby & Callinan (J) [1] (4:0) the jurisdiction of the Court of Disputed Returns, as conferred on the High Court, involves the exercise of judicial power and is not inconsistent with the separation of powers Assent: Gleeson (CJ), Gaudron, Gummow & Hayne (J) [1] Non Deciding: McHugh, Kirby & Callinan (J) [1] (4:0) the United Kingdom is a "foreign power", for the purposes of section 44 of the Australian Constitution[2] Assent: Gleeson (CJ), Gaudron, Gummow & Hayne (J) [1] Non-Deciding: McHugh, Kirby & Callinan (J) [1]

Sue v Hill was an Australian court case decided in the High Court of Australia on 23 June 1999. It concerned a dispute over the apparent return of a candidate, Heather Hill, to the Australian Senate in the 1998 federal election. The result was challenged on the basis that Hill was a dual citizen of the United Kingdom and Australia, and that section 44(i) of the Constitution of Australia prevents any person who is the citizen of a "foreign power" from being elected to the Parliament of Australia. The High Court found that, at least for the purposes of section 44(i), the United Kingdom is a foreign power to Australia.