The General Court found that treaties are subject to constitutional review and occupy the same hierarchical position as ordinary legislation (leis ordinárias or “ordinary laws” in Portuguese). A recent decision of the Brazilian Supreme Court in 2008 changed this situation somewhat by finding that treaties that contain human rights provisions have a higher status than ordinary legislation and are subject only to the Constitution itself. In addition, the 45th Amendment to the Constitution states that human rights treaties, approved by Congress under a specific procedure, occupy the same hierarchical position as an amendment to the Constitution. The hierarchical position of the Treaties with regard to national legislation is relevant to the debate on whether and how the Treaties can annul the former and vice versa. The end of the preamble and the beginning of the agreement itself are often indicated by the words “agreed as follows”. Australian contracts generally fall into the following categories: extradition, postal agreements and payment vouchers, trade and international conventions. Once adopted, treaties and their amendments must follow the formal legal procedures of the United Nations, as applied by the Office of Legal Affairs, including signature, ratification and entry into force. The Australian Constitution allows the executive government to enter into contracts, but the practice is for treaties to be tabled in both Houses of Parliament at least 15 days before signing. Treaties are considered a source of Australian law, but sometimes require an Act of Parliament to be passed in different types.