On 18 February 2026 the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia delivered a landmark judgment in GKX18 v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs (No 5) [2026] FedCFamC2G 204.
The Court held that certain conditions attached to the applicant’s Bridging Visa R are constitutionally invalid. The Court held that "the categories of punishments that can only be imposed by the Chapter III courts are not necessarily confined to interference with life, limb or liberty (in the narrow sense). Other punishments, such as unreasonable restrictions on work, may also infringe Chapter III, even though there is no common law right to work.”
The applicant had argued that conditions placed on his visa by the Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs deprived him of his liberty, were punitive, and exceeded the constitutional limits of the executive arm of government. The applicant argued that the executive has a very narrow remit to deprive a person of their liberty, and that no restriction on a person’s liberty can be executed by the executive pursuant to any executive prerogative or by statute if it does not facilitate the ends of deportation, trial, the execution of a court’s criminal sentence, or extradition. This is because any such other deprivation, whether it be custody or another restriction of liberty, is tantamount to executive punishment which violates Chapter III of the Constitution.
The Court agreed and declared that conditions 8622 and 8623, and the words “violence of” in condition 8624 in the Migration Regulations 1994 are invalid, infringing Chapter III of the Constitution. The Court held that those conditions were prima facie punitive, did not have a legitimate and non-punitive purpose and were excessive.
Madeleine Bridgett appeared for the applicant led by Quintin Rares and instructed by Alison Battisson.
The full judgment can be read here.