LAWS2150 Condensed Notes

Description

LAWS2150 Condensed Notes A roadmap to LAWS2150 topics 4 Callinan, Ian J (1998–2007) 4 Characterisation 4 O. Introduction 4 Two-step approach to characterisation? 4 Subject matter vs purposive powers 4 A. Subject matter powers 5 Examples 5 0. Five principles of characterisation 5 1. Broad reading 5 2. Substance of rights/duties created cf form 5 3. Sufficient connection, legal and practical 5 4. Multiple heads of power 5 5. Irrelevance of proportionality/justice 6 2. Purpose powers 6 Discredited methods for subject matter powers 6 ‘Pith and substance’ of power 6 ‘Close connection’ 6 Coleman v Power (2004) 220 CLR 1 6 Constitutional limitations 7 Convention debates 7 Corporations: s 51(xx) 7 General 7 1. Corporations within s 51(xx) 7 ‘Foreign’ corporations 7 Domestic corporations 7 2. Activities within s 51(xx) 8 Dawson, Sir Daryl J (1982–97) 9 Deane, Sir William J (1982–95) 9 Detention 9 0. Summary of issues 9 1. Cth parliament (protective / migration) (Lim) 9 General principles: Beyond Chu Kheng Lim 9 Protective detention 10 Immigration detention 10 2. Cth court (control) (Boilermakers’ and Lim) 11 Thomas v Mowbray (2007) 11 3. State courts (preventive) (incompatibility) 11 Kable: factors indicating incompatibility 11 Baker: factors NOT indicating incompatibility 11 Fardon: factors indicating NO incompatibility 11 Discrimination 11 Discrimination is a relevant test 11 Discrimination is not a relevant test 11 Dissenter 11 Dixon, Owen CJ (1929–52–64) 11 Engineers’ Case (1920) CLR 12 The decision 12 Critique 12 Against: incoherence of the case 12 For: explaining the case’s endurance 12 Influence on subsequent cases 12 External affairs: s 51(xxix) 12 Relations with other countries 12 Matters external to Australia 12 Impetus for Act from overseas cause 13 Matters of international concern 13 Non-treaty international law 13 Soft international law 13 Treaty implementation 13 1A. Rule: all treaty matters enliven 51(xxix) 13 1B. Exceptions 14 2. Act must implement the treaty 14 Fardon v A-G (Qld) (2004) 223 CLR 575 14 Federal balance 15 Preserving the federal balance 15 Undermining the federal balance 15 Freedom of interstate trade and commerce: s 92 15 Discriminatory burdens of a discriminatory kind 15 Principles in Cole v Whitfield (1988) CLR 15 Regulation permissible under s 92 16 History: Dix’s ‘personal rights’ view 16 Freedom of religion: s 116 16 General approach: common definitions 16 ‘For’: purposive approach 16 Religion 16 Law for establishing any religion 17 Law for imposing any religious observance 17 Law prohibiting the free exercise of religion 17 Religious qualification for Commonwealth office 17 French, Robert CJ (2008–17) 17 Gageler, Stephen J (2012–28) 17 Gibbs, Harry CJ (1971–81–87) 17 Gleeson, Murray CJ (1998–2008) 17 Grants: s 96 17 Factors not limiting s 96 17 Terms and conditions not fixed by Parliament 17 Grant not supported by express head power 17 Grant discriminates between states 17 Grant does not address adversity facing state 17 Grant does not enrich state’s treasury 18 Grant practically induces states’ actions 18 Factors limiting s 96 18 Legal coercion to accept grant 18 Express constitutional constraints 18 Griffith, Samuel CJ (1903–19) 18 Implications 18 Implied freedom of political communication 18 Examples 18 0. Political or government matters 18 1. Burdens on political communications 18 2. Compatibility testing 18 3. Proportionality testing 19 Current restatement cases 19 McCloy v NSW (2015) 19 Union NSW v NSW (2013) 19 Lange v ABC (1997) 19 Older authorities 20 First wave: origins of the implied freedom 20 Second wave: expansion of the freedom 20 Implied immunities of instrumentalities 21 State interference of Commonwealth power 21 Commonwealth interference in state power 21 Erosion of the immunity 21 Incidental power: s 51(xxxix) and implied 21 Express incidental power: s 51(xxxix) 21 Implied incidental power ancillary to each head 21 Incompatibility principles 22 Relationship between Boilermakers’ and Kable 22 Federal courts: Separation of powers / Ch III 22 State courts: Kable principle 22 Inconsistency: s 109 22 1. ‘Valid’ ‘law’ of state and Commonwealth 22 Valid 22 Law 22 2A. Inferred inconsistency 22 General approach 22 ③Direct inconsistency 23 Indirect inconsistency (‘cover the field’) 23 – 1 – ④ Operational inconsistency 23 2B. Manufactured (in)consistency 24 Inconsistency 24 Consistency 24 3. Consequence of inconsistency 24 Isaacs, Isaac CJ (1906–30–31) 25 Judicial activism 25 Judicial power 25 Indicia 25 Jumbunna principle 25 The principle 25 Jury trial: s 80 25 1. ‘On indictment’ 25 Current approach 25 Dissenting broad approach 25 2. ‘Offence against any law of the Cth’ 25 3. What does a s 80 jury require? 26 Justice and wisdom of law 26 Kable cases (1996, 2013) 26 Subsequent interpretation 26 Kable v DPP (NSW) (1996) 189 CLR 51 26 NSW v Kable (2013) 252 CLR 118 27 Kartinyeri v Commonwealth (1998) 195 CLR 337 27 Summary of the judgments 27 Judicial approaches 27 Kirby, Michael J (1996–09) 27 Koowarta v Bjelke-Petersen (1982) 151 CLR 168 27 Legalism 28 Meaning of legalism 28 ‘Strict and complete legalism’: no fixed sense 28 Engineers’ Case (1920) meaning of legalism 28 Implications not precluded by legalism 28 Proponents of legalism 28 For and against legalism 28 Literalism 28 Living tree constitution 28 Fallacy of originalism 28 The ‘living tree’ rhetoric 29 The rhetoric 29 ‘Living tree’ is still rooted 29 Proponents of non-originalism selon Hey 29 Strategic compromise with originalism 29 Examples 29 Mason, Anthony CJ (1972–87–95) 30 McCullough v Maryland, 17 US 316 (1819) 30 Melbourne Corporation v Cth (1947) 74 CLR 31 30 Current restatement II: one principle 30 Discrimination limb rejected: Austin (2003) 30 Factors relating to burden on states 30 Examples 30 Interference with states’ functioning 30 Discrimination 31 Development 31 Early inconclusive cases 31 Restatement I: two limbs 31 Necessity 31 Originalism 31 Intentionalism / intentional originalism 31 Meaning 31 Examples 32 Textualism / textual originalism 32 Meaning 32 Relationship with Jumbunna principle 32 Examples 32 Incremental accommodation 32 Meaning of incremental accommodation 32 HCA’s generosity with accommodation 32 Pape v Cth (2009) 238 CLR 1 32 Politics–law distinction 32 Polyukhovic v Cth (1991) 172 CLR 501 32 Precedent in apex courts 33 0. Theoretical underpinnings 33 Why HCA not bound by its own decisions 33 Examples 33 UK position 33 Rationales for departure from precedent 33 1. Leave required to entertain an overrule issue 33 2. Overturning precedent 33 3. No prospective overruling 34 Proportionality 34 Contexts in which proportionality is used 34 Examples of proportionality tests 34 Failed attempts to extend to other powers 34 Origins of the proportionality test 34 Races: s 51(xxvi) 35 Commentary 35 Usage and original rationale of the clause 35 The 1967 referendum 35 Other races powers 35 People of ‘any’ race 35 People of any ‘race’ 35 ‘Special’ law 35 ‘For whom’: for the benefit of a race? 35 Background to Kartinyeri 35 Kartinyeri 35 Pre-Kartinyeri authorities 35 ‘Deemed necessary’ 36 Reading down and severance 36 Reading down 36 Nature 36 Examples 36 Limits on reading down and severance 36 Reading down 36 Severance 36 Realism 36 Meaning of realism 36 Mason Court’s realism 36 Proponents of realism 36 Representative and responsible government 36 Reserved state powers 37 The principle 37 Aroney’s (2008) defence 37 End of the principle 37 Rights 37 Saving provisions (ss 106–8) 37 Separation of powers 37 State powers 37 Stephen, Ninian J 37 Tasmanian Dam (1983) 37 Taxation: ss 51(ii), 53, 55, 90, 114 38 Taxation power: s 51(ii) 38 A. Positive elements 38 B. Negative elements 38 Prohibition against discrimination 39 Procedure for making tax laws: ss 53, 55 39 Bills for appropriation and imposing tax: s 53 39 Laws for imposing tax: s 55 39 Cth exclusive power over custom/excise: s 90 39 State / Cth not to tax each other’s property: s 114 39 Trade and commerce: ss 51(i), 92 39 – 2 – Contexts where used 39 1. What activities does s 51(i) cover? 39 Regulation and participation 39 Activities besides crossing border 39 2. Can s 51(i) regulate intra-state trade? 40 Invalid: no inter–intra-state distinction 40 Invalid: incidental to activity in Cth power 40 Valid: interfering activity itself in Cth power 40 3. Restrictions on trade and commerce: s 92 40 Treaties (Charlesworth et al 2003) 40 Uniform Tax Cases 41 First Uniform Tax Case (1942) CLR 41 Second Uniform Tax Case (1957) CLR 41 WorkChoices Case (2006) CLR 41