Talk:Chief Justice of Australia: Difference between revisions

 

Line 67: Line 67:

There is a move discussion in progress on [[Talk:Chief Justice of Afghanistan#Requested move 5 July 2025|Talk:Chief Justice of Afghanistan]] which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. <!– Talk:Chief Justice of Afghanistan#Requested move 5 July 2025 crosspost –> —[[User:RMCD bot|RMCD bot]] 02:49, 5 July 2025 (UTC)

There is a move discussion in progress on [[Talk:Chief Justice of Afghanistan#Requested move 5 July 2025|Talk:Chief Justice of Afghanistan]] which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. <!– Talk:Chief Justice of Afghanistan#Requested move 5 July 2025 crosspost –> —[[User:RMCD bot|RMCD bot]] 02:49, 5 July 2025 (UTC)

== A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion ==

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

* [[commons:File:The Hon Chief Justice Stephen Gageler AC.png|The Hon Chief Justice Stephen Gageler AC.png]]<!– COMMONSBOT: discussion | 2025-10-22T07:21:09.855009 | The Hon Chief Justice Stephen Gageler AC.png –>

Participate in the deletion discussion at the [[commons:Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Justices of the High Court of Australia|nomination page]]. —[[User:Community Tech bot|Community Tech bot]] ([[User talk:Community Tech bot|talk]]) 07:21, 22 October 2025 (UTC)

Please see s2A(2) GOVERNOR-GENERAL ACT 1974 (Cth) under “basic rate”. It clearly states “the Chief Justice of Australia”. This page should be moved back. Xtra 14:39, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I think, as Adam said, that this had to do with the fact that Sir Garfield Barwick, who was Justice at the time, preferred the title of Chief Justice of Australia. Every official reference I can find (such as the High Court’s website) says Chief Justice of the High Court of Australia. It’s much of a muchness of course, with the redirect. Lacrimosus 21:17, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC)

A Commonwealth Act is as an official reference as any. The High Court website only uses that wording for convinience. Xtra 22:38, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC)

But surely it’s more convenient (and, if it’s true, more accurate) to describe him as Chief Justice of Australia if indeed that is his official title? I’ve emailed the HCA asking them about it, I’ll also get on to whatever Commonwealth office is responsible for protocol. Lacrimosus 02:35, 19 Mar 2005 (UTC)

ok. but it would be strange if an act of parliament refered to someone by a non-official name. Xtra 02:48, 19 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I think it’s not so much that it’s not an official title, I’m just not sure if it’s the official title. Lacrimosus 02:50, 19 Mar 2005 (UTC)

The following email was received by me from the Public Information Officer of the HCA:

Dear Chris,

Thank-you for your inquiry. The Chief Justice's correct title is Chief
Justice of Australia.

Apart from changing the title, your first sentence should then read:
"The Chief Justice of Australia is the senior justice of the High Court
of Australia and the highest-ranking judicial officer in the
Commonwealth of Australia."

Otherwise, your site looks very impressive. We're always in favour of
initiatives that help educate the public about the Court and its role.

Best wishes,

Fiona Hamilton
Public Information Officer
High Court of Australia

I’ll shift content accordingly. Slac speak up! 04:52, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Well, fancy that. (sorry but my ego implores me to say I said so) Xtra 05:06, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)

The image File:Barwick CJ.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

• That there is a non-free use rationale on the image’s description page for the use in this article.
• That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. —17:28, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Someone created this page which is now an orphan. Can someone have a look at linking to it or doing something with it? Gbawden (talk) 13:50, 14 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi User:Safes007 – I don’t really agree with this move. The official title per the constitution is just “Chief Justice” and official usage is mixed at the very least (see the High Court website and Trove searches). As a recent example, Gageler signed as “Chief Justice of Australia” when he witnessed Mostyn’s oath of office as GG. Usage in Category:Chief justices by country is also mixed but favours the “Chief Justice of [Country]” formulation. I T B F 📢 08:12, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough, that name is more often used than I realised. Feel free to revert. Safes007 (talk) 14:14, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Chief Justice of Afghanistan which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 02:49, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 07:21, 22 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]