Preview

Constitutional Law Assignment 2011

Best Essays
Open Document
Open Document
2525 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Constitutional Law Assignment 2011
Outline:
The purpose of this paper is to Advise Allan, Belinda and CareFree Pty Ltd as to the constitutional validity of the Medicinal Cannabis Act 2011 (Cth) (MCA) in terms of whether its provisions apply to them under the trade and commerce power s 51(i) and as to whether the MCEA (Medicinal Cannabis Export Authority) is constitutionally valid in light of the separation of judicial power doctrine. This paper begins by analysing the validity of MCEA. In doing so the paper not only confers to the characterisation of the laws under the trade and commerce powers of s 51(i), but also includes the implied incidental powers and the doctrine of principles of separation of judicial power. There after it advises Allan, Belinda and Carefree Pty Ltd as to the constitutional validity of the MCA. The rational is simply to first understand the constitutional validity of MCEA, as the outcome of the advisory matter inherently depends on it. Jurisdiction:
The foremost step in determining the validity of the given ACT is to determine the jurisdiction of the given Act. This Medicinal Cannabis Act 2011 (Cth) is a commonwealth Act therefore falls under the Commonwealth Constitution instead of the state based constitution.
Validity of Medicinal Act 2011?
This paper aims to prove whether the given impugned law is valid or invalid. In doing so it follows a three step process in order to determine the validity of the Commonwealth legislation as set out in Grain pool of Western Australia V Commonwealth.

Commonwealth Constitution Head of Power:
The current given Act falls under s 51(i) of the Commonwealth Constitution. This section states that “The Parliament shall, subject to this Constitution, have power to make laws for the peace, order, and good government of the Commonwealth with respect to trade and commerce with other countries, and among the States”.
In interpreting the Medicinal Cannabis Act 2011, this paper sought to adopt golden rule approach which states that the



Bibliography: Cases * Actors and Announcers Equity Association v Fontana Films Pty Ltd (1982) 150 CLR 169. * Amalgamated Society of Engineers v Adelaide Steamship Co ltd (1920) 28 CLR 129. * Bank of NSW v Commonwealth (Bank Nationalisation Case) (1948) 76 CLR 1. * Building Construction Employees and Builders ‘Labourers Federation of New South Wales V Minister for Industrial Relations (1986) 7 NSWLR 372. * Fairfax v Federal Commissioner of taxation (1965) 114 CLR 1. * Grain pool of Western Australia v Commonwealth (2000) 202 CLR 479. * Grannall v Marrickville Margarine Pty Ltd (1955) 93 CLR 55. * Huddart, Parker & Co Pty Ltd v Moorehead (1909) 8 CLR 330. * Re Dingjan: Ex parte Wagner (1995) 183 CLR 323. * Victorian Stevedoring & General Contracting Co Pty Ltd & Meakes v Dignan (1931) 46 CLR 73. Books * Tony Blackshield and George Williams, Australian Constitutional Law and Theory (Federation Press, Fifth ed, 2010) [ 3 ]. Amalgamated Society of Engineers V Adelaide Steamship Co ltd (1920) 28 CLR 129. [ 8 ]. Building Construction Employees and Builders ‘Labourers Federation of New South Wales v Minister for Industrial Relations (1986) 7 NSWLR 372. [ 9 ]. Bank of NSW v Commonwealth (Bank Nationalisation Case) (1948) 76 CLR 1. [ 12 ]. Amalgamated Society of Engineers v Adelaide Steamship Co ltd (1920) 28 CLR 129. [ 14 ]. Tony Blackshield and George Williams, Australian Constitutional Law and Theory (Federation Press, Fifth ed, 2010) [ 15 ] [ 16 ]. Bank of NSW v Commonwealth (Bank Nationalisation Case) (1948) 76 CLR 1. [ 18 ]. Fairfax v Federal Commissioner of taxation (1965) 114 CLR 1. [ 19 ]. Actors and Announcers Equity Association v Fontana Films Pty Ltd (1982) 150 CLR 169. [ 21 ]. Actors and Announcers Equity Association v Fontana Films Pty Ltd (1982) 150 CLR 169. [ 22 ]. Re Dingjan: Ex parte Wagner (1995) 183 CLR 323. [ 24 ]. Grannall v Marrickville Margarine Pty Ltd (1955) 93 CLR 55. [ 27 ]. Grannall v Marrickville Margarine Pty Ltd (1955) 93 CLR 55. [ 29 ]. Huddart, Parker & Co Pty Ltd v Moorehead (1909) 8 CLR 330. [ 30 ]. Victorian Stevedoring & General Contracting Co Pty Ltd & Meakes v Dignan (1931) 46 CLR 73. [ 32 ]. Waterside Workers Federation of Australia v Jw Alexander Ltd (1918) 25 CLR 434. [ 33 ]. New South Wales v Commonwealth wheat case (1915) 20 CLR 54. [ 34 ]. R v Kirby: Ex parte Boilermaker society of Australia (1956) 94 CLR 254. [ 35 ]. Hilton V Wells (1985) 157 CLR 57.

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Better Essays

    Cadia Case Analysis

    • 1711 Words
    • 7 Pages

    Bibliography: Cadia Holdings Pty Ltd v State of New South Wales (2010) 242 CLR 195…

    • 1711 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Best Essays

    Belmont Finance Corporation Ltd v Williams Furniture Ltd (No 2) [1980] 1 All ER 393…

    • 3483 Words
    • 14 Pages
    Best Essays
  • Good Essays

    | 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.This concerned a situation where the Commonwealth passed a law that sought to rely on the banking power vested in s 51(13). The Commonwealth wanted to require that states would only bank with the Commonwealth Bank which was at the time a commonwealth instrumentality. This meant that the States required the consent of the Commonwealth Treasurer before banking with private banks, however, the law was passed so as to say no private bank shall do any business with any state unless they had the written consent of the Federal TreasurerThe court said in a 5:2 majority that the law was not applicable to the states as it singled out state body and burdened it in its governmental capacityLatham CJ with whom Williams J agreed, said that this Commonwealth law was not a law with respect to banking it was a law with respect to state…

    • 28193 Words
    • 113 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Melbourne Corporation v Commonwealth (“Melbourne Corporation Case”) (1947) 74 CLR 31 – Cth introduced Banking Act, prohibited private banks conducting business with State unless Cth Treasurer agreed. Cth laws invalid if they ① deny existence or ability of State to govern itself OR ② single out any one State. Implied limitation on the constitution. 2 limbs – discrimination limb (against State govt/entities), guarantee limb (guarantee exists that we are a Federation). Commonwealth cannot legislate so as to curtail the capacity of State government entities.…

    • 10129 Words
    • 41 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Best Essays

    [ 39 ]. Tony Blackshield and George Williams, Australian Constitutional Law: Law and Theory (The Federation Press, 5th ed: 2010), 9.…

    • 4001 Words
    • 17 Pages
    Best Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    70616: Australian Constitutional Law Final exam revision Contents What is in the exam? 4 Interpretation of the Constitution 5 Characterisation of the law 6 Subject matter powers - sufficient connection test 6 As in the Bank Nationalisation Case 6 As in Fairfax (1965) 6 As in Herald (1966) 6…

    • 6031 Words
    • 25 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Better Essays

    Ned Kelly-Hero or Villian

    • 970 Words
    • 4 Pages

    * "Ned Kelly Australian Ironoutlaw :: IronOutlaw.com :: an NCS publication." Ned Kelly Australian Ironoutlaw :: IronOutlaw.com :: an NCS publication. N.p., n.d. Web. 5 Nov. 2012. <http://www.ironoutlaw.com/>.…

    • 970 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    TABL1710 Autosaved

    • 1915 Words
    • 8 Pages

    ROSE & FRANK COMPANY V JR CROMPTON & BROS LTD (agreed to be bound by principle)…

    • 1915 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    [ 7 ]. Australian Air Express Pty Limited v Langford [2005] NSWCA 96; Hollis v Vabu (2001) 207 CLR 21…

    • 1791 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    eng rwryw efhe gw gweth

    • 841 Words
    • 4 Pages

    Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Co (1893) 1QB 256 Blomley v Ryan (1956) 99 CLR 362
 Commercial Bank of Australia Ltd v Amadio (1983) 151…

    • 841 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Constitutional Convention, 13 February 1998, Transcript of Proceedings. Accessed 9th August 2011, Obtained from http://australianpolitics.com/issues/republic/convention/130298.pdf…

    • 935 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Case Study: Hollis V Vabu

    • 2064 Words
    • 9 Pages

    o Colonial Mutual Life Assurance Society Ltd v Producers and Citizens Co-operative Assurance Co. of Australia Ltd (1919) 26 CLR 110…

    • 2064 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    Lamepard-Trevorrow Case

    • 991 Words
    • 4 Pages

    A: Cases that the court considered whilst determining the outcome of SA v Lampard-Trevorrow were particularly; Meering v Grahame-White Aviation Co Ltd (1919) 122 LT 44; R v Bournewood Community and Mental Health NHS Trust; Ex Parte L [1999] 1 AC 458; Murray v Ministry of Defence [1988] 2 All ER 521; Go v The Queen (1990) 102 FLR 299; Myer Stores Ltd v Soo [1991] 2 VR 597…

    • 991 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Work Choices Case

    • 4012 Words
    • 17 Pages

    5 Tony Blackshield and George Williams, Australian Constitutional Law and Theory: Commentary and Materials (4th ed, 2006) 296.…

    • 4012 Words
    • 17 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    For over 100 years now, Australia has operated under its rather prized constitution that is in hindsight evidently lacklustre in respect to individual rights and freedoms. The Australian constitution was thought to be sufficient in regards to rights and freedoms despite the lack of an entrenched bill of rights. However, when one dissects the constitution, it becomes increasingly evident that constitutional implications are not an effective way of protecting individual rights and freedoms, and the only way to achieve this is through a bill of rights.…

    • 2521 Words
    • 11 Pages
    Powerful Essays