Conclusive certificates under s 36(8) of the Aboriginal Land Rights Act 1983 (NSW) are not void merely because the briefing note upon which the Minister acted used the word 'used' rather than 'needed', or because particular matters were not given sufficient prominence in the briefing note. The Carltona principle does not apply to attribute the opinion of an officer outside the Minister's department to the Minister where there is no basis for inferring a conferral of authority. Assessment of the adequacy of prominence given to matters in a ministerial briefing note is outside the proper scope of judicial review.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 14 later cases that cite this judgment.
4 of the 14 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.