George Brandis (Queensland, Liberal Party, Attorney-General) Share this | Hansard source

I thank the honourable senator for his question. A short while ago, the High Court gave its decision in the Commonwealth's proceedings seeking a declaration of invalidity against the ACT's same-sex marriage legislation. As a result of the decision, the judges decided in a unanimous joint judgment of six of Their Honours to uphold the Commonwealth's legal challenge. One member of the court, Justice Gageler, recused himself, I understand because, as Commonwealth Solicitor-General, His Honour had given legal advice to the Commonwealth.

The Commonwealth welcomes this decision. The basis upon which the decision was reached by Their Honours was the supremacy of the marriage power in section 51(xxi) of the Constitution. I will read a couple of sentences from the statement that the court published:

The Marriage Act provides that a marriage can be solemnised in Australia only between a man and woman and that a union solemnised in a foreign country between a same sex couple must not be recognised as a marriage in Australia. That act is a comprehensive and exhaustive statement of the law of marriage.

As a result, the inconsistent provisions of the ACT legislation were held to be void and of no effect. As I said on 10 October when I announced that the Commonwealth would initiate these proceedings:

Irrespective of anyone's views on the desirability or otherwise of same-sex marriage, it is clearly in Australia's interests that there be nationally consistent marriage laws.

At the moment, the Commonwealth Marriage Act provides that consistency. That is the position which the High Court, I am pleased to say, has upheld today.