Dear Readers,
I recieved a question from a reader about the cases that I studied for High Court interpretation. So I thought Id take a brief break from the Constitutional Protection of Rights questions and provide you with a little bit of information regarding the two that I did.
The first case:
Roads Case 1926 between Victoria and the Commonwealth. A dispute the fact that the Commonwealth had said we will give you this grant, if you spend it on the roads system.
Consequently:
o Substantial increase in Commonwealth financial powers
o Could dictate terms of grants
o Commonwealth can now indirectly control residual powers
o Recent example: Howard Gov grants influence education in 2004
The second case:
Franklin Dam case 1983 between Tasmania and the Commonwealth. A Dispute regarding the Commonwealth disallowing the Tasmanian government from damning the Franklin river (which was part of a ‘protected’ area if I remember correctly).
Consequently:
o Increased commonwealth power by using external affairs power(S51 (xxix))
o Plan to damn Franklin and Gordon rivers for hydroelectric scheme
o Rejected 4-3 decision
o Commonwealth powers increased in areas previously residual
o If:
- Treaty signed
- Legislation passed to ratify treaty
- And the situation is of national and international significance
o Then power can be used in unlimited ways
o Example where the interpretation had influence later legislation: Koowarta case 1982 stopping discrimination
Legal Studies VCE 