Williams V Commonwealth Case Study
WILLIAMS V THE COMMONWEALTH
[2012] 248 CLR 156
I INTRODUCTION
Williams v The Commonwealth is an excellent example of a significant turning point in Australian Constitutional history. It challenged Executive power, the capacity the Commonwealth had to spend public money, and its’ power to enter into contracts without the authorisation of Parliament . The breadth of Executive power is covered under s61 of the Constitution, and describes activities which the executive can carry out . The Williams case rejected the accepted assumption that ‘federal executive power was at least as broad as the legislative powers of the Commonwealth” .
II THE CASE
A Facts
The SUQ entered into the Funding Agreement with the Commonwealth, which would have provided …show more content…
The court ruled that he had standing as his children were enrolled in the school . It was also ruled that the Plaintiff ‘…has sufficient interest in the validity of the appropriation of moneys in support of that expenditure’ .
The Court ruled that the Funding Agreement and payments made to the SUQ were made beyond the executive power of the Commonwealth . The Court rejected the Commonwealth’s argument that they had not extended their power beyond s 61 of the Constitution, and held that ‘… the making of the payments by the Commonwealth to SUQ pursuant to the Agreement was not supported by s 61’ .
It was held by a majority that where there was an absence of statutory authority, s 61 did not provide power to the Commonwealth to enter into the Agreement or make challenged payments . The Commonwealth argued that under s 44 of the Financial Management and Accountability Act 1997 (Cth) they had the necessary statutory authorisation to do so. A majority rejected this argument.
The Plaintiff argued that Funding Agreement and the payments made to the SUQ were unlawful as they were prohibited by s 116 of the Constitution. The Court rejected this argument and unanimously agreed that the chaplain did not enter into any arrangements with the Commonwealth
[2012] 248 CLR 156
I INTRODUCTION
Williams v The Commonwealth is an excellent example of a significant turning point in Australian Constitutional history. It challenged Executive power, the capacity the Commonwealth had to spend public money, and its’ power to enter into contracts without the authorisation of Parliament . The breadth of Executive power is covered under s61 of the Constitution, and describes activities which the executive can carry out . The Williams case rejected the accepted assumption that ‘federal executive power was at least as broad as the legislative powers of the Commonwealth” .
II THE CASE
A Facts
The SUQ entered into the Funding Agreement with the Commonwealth, which would have provided …show more content…
The court ruled that he had standing as his children were enrolled in the school . It was also ruled that the Plaintiff ‘…has sufficient interest in the validity of the appropriation of moneys in support of that expenditure’ .
The Court ruled that the Funding Agreement and payments made to the SUQ were made beyond the executive power of the Commonwealth . The Court rejected the Commonwealth’s argument that they had not extended their power beyond s 61 of the Constitution, and held that ‘… the making of the payments by the Commonwealth to SUQ pursuant to the Agreement was not supported by s 61’ .
It was held by a majority that where there was an absence of statutory authority, s 61 did not provide power to the Commonwealth to enter into the Agreement or make challenged payments . The Commonwealth argued that under s 44 of the Financial Management and Accountability Act 1997 (Cth) they had the necessary statutory authorisation to do so. A majority rejected this argument.
The Plaintiff argued that Funding Agreement and the payments made to the SUQ were unlawful as they were prohibited by s 116 of the Constitution. The Court rejected this argument and unanimously agreed that the chaplain did not enter into any arrangements with the Commonwealth