Have there been major legal cases or controversies in Australia involving Sharia practices since 2020?
Executive summary
There is sparse recent reporting of major, high‑profile Australian court cases that put “Sharia law” itself on trial since 2020; most litigation and public controversy instead involves isolated family‑law or testamentary disputes where Islamic practices were discussed alongside settled Australian law (for example, Omari v Omari and other cases referenced by the Judicial Commission and academic reviews) [1]. Government and media fact‑checks through 2025 show recurring political and social controversies — including false social posts claiming Labor endorsed Sharia and calls to recognise aspects of Islamic law — but official policy has repeatedly and clearly rejected formal legal recognition of Sharia in Australia [2] [3] [4].
1. Courts have dealt with Islamic practices, not a Sharia legal system
Australian courts have considered questions arising from religiously informed agreements (wills, prenuptial‑type deeds, family arrangements) where parties invoked Islamic principles, but judges applied Australian common law principles — for example, a dispute over Mariem Omari’s will was decided on testamentary capacity and Australian law rather than by enforcing Sharia as a parallel legal system [1]. Judicial material collected by the NSW Judicial Commission and legal commentators frames these as “navigation” of dual systems by litigants, not wholesale recognition of a separate Sharia jurisdiction [1].
2. No major national legal shift toward recognising Sharia since 2020
Multiple government statements and policy responses have continued to reject formal recognition of Sharia in the Australian legal system. Historical Australian Attorney‑General statements cited in background pieces assert that “Sharia law has no place in the Australian legal system” and that Australian law prevails where there is inconsistency — a position reiterated in reporting and commentary up through recent years [4] [5]. Available sources do not identify any 2020–2025 statute or High Court decision that establishes a parallel Sharia legal order in Australia [2].
3. Controversy since 2020 has been political and social, often driven by misinformation
From 2024–2025 there were viral social posts and parody images falsely suggesting federal leaders or the Labor Party advocated legalising Sharia; these were debunked by AAP and AFP fact‑checks which trace the posts to parody accounts or misused older research, not government policy changes [3] [2] [6]. These fact‑checks show much public controversy has been about perception and political mobilisation rather than concrete legal change [3] [2].
4. Advocacy and calls for “accommodation” continue to drive debate
Organisations such as the Australian Federation of Islamic Councils (AFIC) and other commentators have at times called for legal pluralism or more accommodation of Muslim practices in family and personal law; such submissions have prompted parliamentary inquiries and media debate, but governments have explicitly declined to implement a dual legal system [7] [4]. Analysis pieces in public forums argue a dual system would be impractical and unsustainable, highlighting competing expert views on accommodation versus the “one law for all” approach [8] [4].
5. What litigation does exist tends to concern private agreements and their enforceability
Cases in Australian courts that touch Sharia‑informed arrangements commonly raise standard legal questions — capacity, public policy, contract enforceability, recognition of foreign marriages — rather than constitutional recognition of religious law. Commentators point to examples (such as dowry agreements, marital deeds, wills) where courts have sometimes upheld obligations that align with religious practice when they satisfy Australian legal tests [1] [4]. New academic reviews continue to emphasise that where Sharia practices conflict with Australian law they are “not valid” in Australia [9].
6. Two competing public narratives — protection of rights vs. cultural accommodation
One narrative frames recognition or accommodation of aspects of Sharia as a threat to statutory protections and gender equality; another frames informal use of Islamic law by Muslims as reasonable self‑regulation and cultural accommodation within Australia’s multicultural framework. Both narratives appear in the materials: conservative commentators warn of erosion of common‑law rights [10] [11], while legal and community sources note that many Muslims seek cultural mechanisms to resolve family disputes without supplanting Australian law [4] [1].
7. Limits of the available reporting and where questions remain
Available sources up to 2025 do not document any major new High Court or legislative change that enshrines Sharia as state law; they emphasise contested public debate, individual court disputes, and misinformation episodes [2] [3] [1]. For post‑2025 developments or localised state tribunal decisions not covered here, available sources do not mention those outcomes — further targeted legal‑database searches or court registers would be required to identify smaller, recent rulings not cited in these materials (not found in current reporting).
Bottom line: since 2020 the primary flashpoints in Australia have been political controversy, community advocacy, isolated family‑law and testamentary disputes where Islamic practices were raised, and significant misinformation — not any Supreme Court or legislative recognition of Sharia as a parallel legal system [1] [2] [3].