The Court held that a restricted prisoner declaration under s 175H of the Corrective Services Act 2006 (Qld) was not rendered unlawful by an incorrect cross-reference to s 175D(b) instead of s 175D(a), as the power was conditioned on the prisoner being a 'restricted prisoner' within s 175D generally, not on the specific sub-classification cited. An extension of time of over two years was refused where the applicant provided no adequate explanation for the delay and the application lacked merit. The Court further held that the President's refusal to vacate the declaration was not a reviewable 'decision under an enactment' within the meaning of the Judicial Review Act, applying the Tang test, because no statutory power to vacate existed and the refusal did not confer, alter or affect legal rights or obligations.
The full text is available to signed-in members.