The issue of incompatibility was expounded in the 1995 case of "Grollo v Palmer", which concerned new provisions in the same telecommunications legislation that had been considered in "Hilton v Wells". Following the decision in "Hilton", the legislation had been amended to make it more explicit that the function of granting warrants was being conferred on judges in their personal capacity, and had made the judge's consent an eligibility requirement, but the changes had also introduced protections and immunities for judges exercising the function, like those afforded to Justices of the High Court. The court unanimously agreed that the function was being conferred on the judges as "personae designatae", but the question was whether the function was incompatible with their judicial office.