✅ HD APPROVED - CONSTITUTIONAL LAW (UPDATED FOR 2026) - MLP323

Description

Master Australian Constitutionalism with the exact notes I used to score an HD. These notes are professionally structured for high-pressure online quizzes, assignments, and exams, providing the clarity you need to succeed in MLP323. These notes cover: 1 | AN INTRODUCTION TO AUSTRALIAN CONSTITUTIONALISM - AUSTRALIAN CONSTITUTIONALISM - SOURCES OF AUSTRALIAN CONSTITUTIONAL LAW - HISTORY - COLONIAL PERIOD - FOUR FETTERS - HISTORY - COLONIAL PERIOD: TOWARDS FEDERATION 1880s & 1890s - HISTORY - FEDERATION 1901 - Chapter VIII - Alteration of the Constitution: s 128 - EVALUATION OF CONSTITUTION - CONSTITUTIONAL INTERPRETATION - HISTORY - FEDERATION 1901 TO 1986 - Balfour Declaration 1926 - Statute of Westminster 1931 (UK) - HISTORY - 1986 TO TODAY - Australia Act 1986 (Cth) - POST FEDERATION - Australian law currently - FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES - State vs Cth powers - PARLIAMENTARY SOVEREIGNTY - RULE OF LAW - CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTIONS - RESPONSIBLE GOVERNMENT - MINISTERIAL RESPONSIBILITY - Individual responsibility - Collective responsibility - PARLIAMENTARY CONTROL OVER SUPPLY - SEPARATION OF POWER - Overlap between powers - Reasons for the separation of legislative, executive and judicial power - FEDERALISM - Balance of power - 1) Specific/enumerated powers - 2) Exclusive powers - 3) Concurrent powers - 4) Residual powers - Federation movement - Reasons for Commonwealth dominance? - Engineers’ Case (1920) 28 CLR at 145 - JUDICIAL REVIEW 3 | THE LEGISLATURE (PARLIAMENT) - COLONIAL HISTORY - STRUCTURE OF COMMONWEALTH LEGISLATURE - SENATE: s 7 / s 122 - HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES: s 24 - Western Australia v Cth (Territorial Senators’ Case (No 1)) (1975) - Second Territorial Senators’ Case (No. 2) (1977) - STRUCTURE OF VICTORIAN LEGISLATURE - Constitution Act 1975 (Vic) - STRUCTURE OF TERRITORIAL LEGISLATURE - DURATION - INTRODUCTION & TERMINOLOGY - Traditional model - DURATION - VICTORIAN PARLIAMENT - Adjourned/ Prorogation - DURATION - COMMONWEALTH PARLIAMENT - QUALIFICATIONS FOR MEMBERSHIP: Cth Parliament - DISQUALIFICATION (Cth): s 44 - Sykes v Cleary (1992) (bi-election when seat becomes vacant by death or resign) - Reasonable steps test - ‘foreign power’: s 44(i) - Sue v Hill (1999) - QUALIFICATIONS FOR MEMBERSHIP: Victorian Parliament - CTH ELECTORAL & VOTING SYSTEMS - HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES: s 24, 29 - Voting equality - McKinlay (1975) 4 | LEGISLATIVE PROCEDURES - OVERVIEW - 1) STANDARD LEGISLATIVE PROCEDURES (Cth and State) - 2) ROYAL ASSENT - Withholding assent: s 58 - 3) CTH ALTERNATIVE LEGISLATIVE PROCEDURES: s 57 - Cormack v Cope (1974) (occurrence of double dissolution) - ‘PMA Case’ (HCA, 1975) - Effect of High Court’s jurisprudence - Territory Senators’ (No 1) (1975) - 4) CTH RESTRICTIVE PROCEDURES: s 128 - 5) CTH SPECIAL PROCEDURES: ss 53, 54, 55 - Importance of money to governments - SENATE - Money bills - Section 53 - VIC UPPER HOUSE - Money bills / blocking appropriation bills - ANTI-TACKING - Section 55 - Air Caledonie v Commonwealth (High Court, 1988) (case looked at legislation which amended a Principal Act) - Permanent Trustee Australia Ltd v Commissioner for State Revenue (2004) - Air Caledonie - State Chamber of Commerce and Industry v Commonwealth (1987) [] - Mutual Pools & Staff v Commissioner of Taxation (1987) - 6) VICTORIAN ALTERNATIVE LEGISLATIVE PROCEDURES - 7) STATE RESTRICTIVE LEGISLATIVE PROCEDURES - Sovereign Parliament ( UK) - Colonial / State Parliaments - State restrictive legislative procedures - Australia Act 1986 (Cth) - Basal position (s 2) - Section 6 exception - Westlakes ( Supreme Court, 1980) - Attorney-General (WA) v Marquet (HCA, 2003) (laws changing electoral districts is effecting constitution of parliament) - Constitution Act 1975 (Vic) - Constitution Act 1975 (Vic): s 85 re Supreme Court - 8) VICTORIAN SPECIAL PROCEDURES - ‘Appropriation bills’ - ‘Annual appropriation bill’ - WHITLAM DISMISSAL (1975) - Whitlam dismissal: Senate’s Deferral of Supply 1975 5 | THE JUDICIARY - THE JUDICIARY: COMMONWEALTH: Ch III - The High Court - Constitutional ‘Assumption’ of rule of law: s 75 - THE JUDICIARY: VICTORIA - Fundamental principle that are not entrenched provisions - Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth) 6 | CHARACTERISATION - INTRODUCTION - CHARACTERISATION - () - First doctrine: Doctrine of implied immunities - Second doctrine: Doctrine of implied prohibitions / ‘Reserve powers’ doctrine - ENGINEERS’ CASE (1920) - CHARACTERISATION: (1920-Present) - Test: Characterisation - 5 PRINCIPLES OF CHARACTERISATION: Grain Pool of Western Australia v Commonwealth - Heads of power - Dual Characterisation - INCIDENTAL POWERS/RANGE - PURPOSIVE & NON-PURPOSIVE HEADS OF POWER & RELEVANCE OF PURPOSE - Murphyores - Fairfax (1965) (about tax) - HEADS OF POWER & RELEVANCE OF PROPORTIONALITY - Proportionality test - Thomas v Mowbray (2007) 2 | THE EXECUTIVE - THE EXECUTIVE - Commonwealth Executive power: s 61 - Scope of s 61 - Executive: ’Constitutional monarchy’ - Executive: ’The Crown’ - GENERIC FEATURES OF AUSTRALIAN EXECUTIVES - The legal institutions of the Executive - Composition of the Executive - Executive council - Ministers (incl PM) - Government departments & Public servants - The Senate - The first minister - The opposition - Cabinet - CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTIONS - CONVENTIONS: Responsible government - Institutions of responsible government - SOURCES OF EXECUTIVE POWER - RESERVE POWERS - 1) Appoint and dismiss the Chief Minister - 2) To dismiss PM / dissolve Parliament; and - 3) To refuse to dissolve parliament - 4) To dissolve both houses / force dissolution of Parliament - 5) To dismiss Government acting illegally - 6) Powers re Australia’s Head of State - PREROGATIVE POWERS - Barton v Cth (1982) - Tampa Case - Ruddock v Vardarlis (2001) - Whitlam Dismissal (1975) - IMPLIED NATIONHOOD POWER - AAP Case (1975) (modern expression of the nationhood power) - Queen & Sharkey - Davis v Cth (1988) - Proportionality test (Davis) - Pape (2009) - STATE EXECUTIVE POWER 7 | FINANCIAL & ECONOMIC POWERS - TAXATION - TAXATION: Cth powers - Limitations - TAXATION: State powers - CTH INDIRECT SPENDING: Grants power s 96 - First Uniform Tax Case (1942) - Second Uniform Tax Case (1957) - CTH DIRECT SPENDING - Pharmaceutical Benefits Case (1944) - AAP Case (1975) - Current Application - Williams v The Commonwealth of Australia & Ors [2012] HCA 23 - Williams (NO 2) - CORPORATIONS POWER: s 51(xx) - Huddart Parker (1909) - 1) What kinds of corporations can the Cth regulate? - Foreign corporations: no issue (can legislate under s 51(xx)) - Trading corporations - St George County Council (1974) - Financial corporations - State Superannuation Board v Trade Practices Commission (1982) - 2) What is the scope of the corporations power? - Tasmania Dam Case (1983) - WorkChoices Case (2006) - Incorporation Case (1990) 8 | EXTERNAL AFFAIRS & EXTRATERRITORIALITY - COMMONWEALTH EXTERNAL AFFAIRS POWER: s 51(xxix) - 1) PHYSICAL EXTERNALITY - NSW v Cth (Seas and Submerged Lands case) (1975) - Polyukhovich v Cth (1991) - Xyz v Commonwealth (2006) - 2) INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS - 3) IMPLEMENTATION OF INTERNATIONAL TREATIES & CONVENTIONS - Koowarta v Bjelke-Peterson (Precursor to Tasmania Dam (1983)) - Tasmania Dams Case (1983) - Industrial Relations Act Case (1996) - Conformity test (Industrial Relations Act case) - Specificity test (Industrial Relations Act case) - 4) MATTERS OF INTERNATIONAL CONCERN - THE STATES - Union Steamship v King (1988) - SUMMARY of ‘Treaty Implementation Aspect’ of external Affairs power 9 | INCONSISTENCY - INCONSISTENCY - TESTS FOR INCONSISTENCY (s 109) - 1) Simultaneous obedience test - R v Licensing Court of Brisbane; ex parte Daniell (1920) - Australian Boot Trade Employers Federation v Whybrow (1910) - 2) Conferral of rights test - Clyde Engineering v Cowburn (1926) - Colvin v Bradley - 3) Covering the field test - Ascertaining intention to displace state law: Relevant factors - INTERGOVERNMENTAL IMMUNITIES - Engineers’ ‘explosion’ of both doctrines - Melbourne Corporation Principle (1947) (‘MCP’) - Melbourne Corporation v Cth (State Banking Case) - ‘Melbourne Corporation Principle’ - Queensland Electricity Commission v Cth (1985) 159 CLR 192 - Australian Education Union; Ex parte Victoria (1995) 185 CLR 188 - Reformulation of the MCP - Austin v Cth (2003) - Clarke v Commissioner of Taxation (2009) - STATES OVER COMMONWEALTH - Cth v Cigamatic (1962) - DHA Case (1997) - Re Residential Tenancies Tribunal of NSW and Henderson; ex parte Defence Housing Authority (1997) - CROWN IMMUNITY & STATUTORY CONSTRUCTION - Bropho v WA (1990) 10 | RIGHTS & FREEDOMS - CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS - ACQUISITION OF PROPERTY ON JUST TERMS: s 51(xxxi) ‘The Castle Power’ - Minister for the Army v Dalziel - Newcrest Mining v Cth - Wurridjal v Cth - British American Tobacco Case - TRIAL BY JURY: s 80 - When does s 80 apply? - Queen v Bernasconi (1915) HCA - Lowenstein (Minority dissent view) - Kingswell - Cheng - Cheatle - Brownlee - FREEDOM OF RELIGION: s 116 - Definition of religion - Church of the New Faith v Commissioner for Pay- Roll Tax (Vic) (1983) 145 CLR 120 - No establishment of a religion - DOGS Case - Prohibiting free exercise of religion - Krygger v Williams - Adelaide Company of Jehovah’s Witnesses v Cth - Kruger v Cth - FREEDOM FROM INTERSTATE DISCRIMINATION: s 117 - Street v QLD Bar Association - Test (Street v QLD Bar Association): - Exception - IMPLIED RIGHTS - FREEDOM OF POLITICAL COMMUNICATION - Australian Capital Television v Commonwealth - Theophanous v Herald & Weekly Times Ltd (1994) 182 CLR 104 - Levy (1997) - Langer (1996) - Lange v Australian Broadcasting Corporation (1997) HCA - ‘Lange Test’ - Refinement of ‘Lange test’ in McCloy - - McCloy v NSW [2015] HCA 34 - McCloy proportionality test - RIGHT TO VOTE - Roach (2007) - Mckinlay’s Case - Rowe v Electoral Commissioner (2010) - Murphy v Electoral Commissioner [2016] HCA 36 11 | SEPARATION OF POWERS - CTH SEPARATION OF POWERS - Thomas v Mowbray - CTH SEPARATION: Judicial power - Key indicia of judicial power - 1st principle: Cth Judicial power only exercisable by Chapter III courts - NSW v Commonwealth (1915) 20 CLR 54 (‘Wheat Case’) - 2nd principle: Federal courts can only exercise Cth judicial power - Boilermakers’ Case (1956) - EXCEPTIONS & QUALIFICATIONS - R v Joske (1976) - R v Richards (1955) - R v Bevan (1942)/ Re Tracey (1989)/ Ex Parte Alpert (2004) - Harris v Calamine (1991) - Hilton v Wells (1985) - Grollo v Palmer (1995) - Wilson v Minister for Aboriginal Affairs (1996) - Three step test of incompatibility (Wilson v Minister for Aboriginal Affairs): - PREVENTATIVE DETENTION - 1) ‘A priori’ view - 2) ‘Flexible’ view - Lim (1992) - Al Kateb (2004) - Fardon (2004) - RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN LEGISLATIVE & EXECUTIVE POWER - Victorian Stevedoring and General Contracting v Dignan (HCA, 1931) - STATE SEPARATION OF POWERS - City of Collingwood (No. 2) (1994) - Kable principle - Kable (1996) - Kable principle - Summary - Bradley (2000) - Forge (2006) - International Finance Trust Company v NSW Crime Commission (2009) - South Australia v Totani (2010) - Kirk (2010) - Wainohu v NSW (2011) - STATE LEGISLATIVE & EXECUTIVE POWERS