Melbourne Corporation v Commonwealth, also known as the Melbourne Corporation case or the State banking case,[1] is an important case in Australian constitutional law. It stands for the proposition that there are limits on the scope of express Commonwealth legislative powers which can be implied from the federal character of the Constitution.
The Lord Mayor, Councillors and Citizens of the City of Melbourne v The Commonwealth and Another
Decided
13 August 1947
Citation(s)
[1947] HCA 26, (1947) 74 CLR 31
Case opinions
(5:1) Any Commonwealth law that is otherwise valid under a head of power in s51 or some other part of the Constitution will be invalid if it denies the existence or ability of a State to govern itself or the federal structure of the Commonwealth or singles out any one State
The principle renders constitutionally invalid any Commonwealth law that is otherwise valid under a head of power in s51 or some other part of the Constitution if it:
Places a special burden on the states;
Significantly impairs, curtails or weakens the capacity of states or state agencies to exercise their constitutional powers or functions.[2]
Significance
This constitutional protection is one of the few reliable protections in the Australian Constitution against legislative and executive power, the other main protection being the Chapter III Separation of Powers Doctrine.
Recent developments
The recent case of Austin v Commonwealth[3] conflated the original two-limbed test of the original case into an expanded 1st limb so that a commonwealth law that affects a state's ability to administer itself is constitutionally invalid.
melbourne, corporation, commonwealth, also, known, melbourne, corporation, case, state, banking, case, important, case, australian, constitutional, stands, proposition, that, there, limits, scope, express, commonwealth, legislative, powers, which, implied, fro. Melbourne Corporation v Commonwealth also known as the Melbourne Corporation case or the State banking case 1 is an important case in Australian constitutional law It stands for the proposition that there are limits on the scope of express Commonwealth legislative powers which can be implied from the federal character of the Constitution Melbourne Corporation v CommonwealthCourtHigh Court of AustraliaFull case nameThe Lord Mayor Councillors and Citizens of the City of Melbourne v The Commonwealth and AnotherDecided13 August 1947Citation s 1947 HCA 26 1947 74 CLR 31Case opinions 5 1 Any Commonwealth law that is otherwise valid under a head of power in s51 or some other part of the Constitution will be invalid if it denies the existence or ability of a State to govern itself or the federal structure of the Commonwealth or singles out any one StateCourt membershipJudge s sittingLatham CJ Rich Starke Dixon McTiernan Williams JJ Contents 1 Principle 2 Significance 3 Recent developments 4 See also 5 External links 6 ReferencesPrinciple EditThe Melbourne Corporation principle is an implied limit on Commonwealth legislative power under the Constitution of Australia The principle renders constitutionally invalid any Commonwealth law that is otherwise valid under a head of power in s51 or some other part of the Constitution if it Places a special burden on the states Significantly impairs curtails or weakens the capacity of states or state agencies to exercise their constitutional powers or functions 2 Significance EditThis constitutional protection is one of the few reliable protections in the Australian Constitution against legislative and executive power the other main protection being the Chapter III Separation of Powers Doctrine Recent developments EditThe recent case of Austin v Commonwealth 3 conflated the original two limbed test of the original case into an expanded 1st limb so that a commonwealth law that affects a state s ability to administer itself is constitutionally invalid See also EditRe Australian Education UnionExternal links EditTwomey A Federal Limitations on the Legislative Power of the States and the Commonwealth to Bind One Another 2003 31 3 Federal Law Review 507 References Edit Melbourne Corporation v Commonwealth 1947 HCA 26 1947 74 CLR 31 13 August 1947 High Court Australia Clarke v Commissioner of Taxation 2009 HCA 33 2009 240 CLR 272 High Court Australia Austin v Commonwealth 2003 HCA 3 2003 215 CLR 185 5 February 2003 High Court Australia This article related to Australian law is a stub You can help Wikipedia by expanding it vte Retrieved from https en wikipedia org w index php title Melbourne Corporation v Commonwealth amp oldid 1100110567, wikipedia, wiki, book, books, library,
