This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles
Leahy v Attorney-General (NSW) is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.AustraliaWikipedia:WikiProject AustraliaTemplate:WikiProject AustraliaAustralia articles
The Wikimedia Australia chapter can be contacted via email to helpwikimedia.org.au for non-editorial assistance.
This article is written in Australian English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, realise, program, labour (but Labor Party)) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.
Latest comment: 6 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
The existing content clearly wasn't an acceptable Wikipedia article, and seemed to be a lazy cut-paste job. Thus it was replaced with the current stub. Some searches clearly suggest this is a notable and frequently-referenced case, but needs a bit more legal understanding that I can provide. Dl2000 (talk) 02:54, 18 February 2011 (UTC)Reply
I have substantially re-written the article. It is now at a decent level in terms of the background, decision of the High Court and of the Privy Council. The article would benefit from additional detail on its subsequent judicial and academic consideration. Find bruce (talk) 04:03, 22 September 2017 (UTC)Reply