(5:1) A licensing scheme with a backdating mechanism is not an excise (per Barwick CJ, Menzies, Gibbs, Stephen & Mason JJ; McTiernan J dissenting)
Laws applied
Overruled by
Vanderstock v Victoria (2023)
In this case, the Act in question imposed licences for the sale of tobacco, and the fee was calculated as being 4.5 percent of the retail value of tobacco sold in the 12-month period ending 6 months prior to the licence period. Three judges, namely Gibbs, Menzies and Stephen JJ, applied the criterion of liability approach from Dennis Hotels Pty Ltd v Victoria[2] and held that the fee was not an excise and thus not invalid by section 90. Barwick CJ and Mason J, while disapproving of the criterion of liability approach, felt bound to follow the precedent set by Dennis Hotels, since the facts of that cases were quite similar to those in this case.
The Court, with the exception of McTiernan J, excluded consumption taxes from duties of excise, although such taxes are frequently also a tax on the sale of goods.
In 2023, the High Court overruled Dickenson's Arcade Pty Ltd v Tasmania in the case Vanderstock v Victoria.
Winterton, G. et al. Australian federal constitutional law: commentary and materials, 1999. LBC Information Services, Sydney.
January 01, 1970
dickenson, arcade, tasmania, this, article, includes, list, general, references, lacks, sufficient, corresponding, inline, citations, please, help, improve, this, article, introducing, more, precise, citations, january, 2018, learn, when, remove, this, message. This article includes a list of general references but it lacks sufficient corresponding inline citations Please help to improve this article by introducing more precise citations January 2018 Learn how and when to remove this message Dickenson s Arcade Pty Ltd v Tasmania also known as the Tobacco Tax case 1 is a High Court of Australia case that dealt with section 90 of the Australian Constitution Dickenson s Arcade Pty Ltd v TasmaniaCourtHigh Court of AustraliaDecided1 April 1974Citation s 1974 HCA 9 1974 130 CLR 529Court membershipJudge s sittingBarwick CJ McTiernan Menzies Gibbs Stephen and Mason JJCase opinions 5 1 A licensing scheme with a backdating mechanism is not an excise per Barwick CJ Menzies Gibbs Stephen amp Mason JJ McTiernan J dissenting Laws appliedOverruled byVanderstock v Victoria 2023 In this case the Act in question imposed licences for the sale of tobacco and the fee was calculated as being 4 5 percent of the retail value of tobacco sold in the 12 month period ending 6 months prior to the licence period Three judges namely Gibbs Menzies and Stephen JJ applied the criterion of liability approach from Dennis Hotels Pty Ltd v Victoria 2 and held that the fee was not an excise and thus not invalid by section 90 Barwick CJ and Mason J while disapproving of the criterion of liability approach felt bound to follow the precedent set by Dennis Hotels since the facts of that cases were quite similar to those in this case The Court with the exception of McTiernan J excluded consumption taxes from duties of excise although such taxes are frequently also a tax on the sale of goods In 2023 the High Court overruled Dickenson s Arcade Pty Ltd v Tasmania in the case Vanderstock v Victoria See also editSection 90 of the Constitution of Australia Australian constitutional lawReferences edit Dickenson s Arcade Pty Ltd v Tasmania 1974 HCA 9 1974 130 CLR 177 1 April 1974 High Court Dennis Hotels Pty Ltd v Victoria 1960 HCA 10 1960 104 CLR 529 26 February 1960 High Court Winterton G et al Australian federal constitutional law commentary and materials 1999 LBC Information Services Sydney Retrieved from https en wikipedia org w index php title Dickenson 27s Arcade Pty Ltd v Tasmania amp oldid 1195278251, wikipedia, wiki, book, books, library,
