Click here to have a similar A+ quality paper

Order Now

This essay only covers the first three weeks of material covered in the course and nothing else. This includes, fundamental principles, trade and commerce power and inconsistency. Do not consider Corporations Power for this problem question. Please rely solely on the reading guide provided below. Please note the following abbreviations are used:
Casebook = P. Gerangelos et al Winterton’s Australian Federal Constitutional Law: Commentary and Materials (3rdedn 2013)
BGW = Keven Booker, Arthur Glass and Robert Watt Federal Constitutional Law: An Introduction (2ndedn 1998)
Zines = Leslie Zines The High Court and the Constitution (5thedn 2008) WEEK 1: Introduction to Australian Constitutional Law and Fundamental Principles of Australian Constitutional Law Using the Trade & Commerce Power (s. 51(i)) as an Illustration. REQUIRED READING a) Introduction to Australian Constitutional Law 1. BGW Chapter 2 (pp 9-27), available via short loans online.
This is necessary background knowledge, not demanding analytical reading. Every student of the Australian constitution should know this material so do be sure to read it but don’t spend too long on it. 2. Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act 1900 (Imp).
Please read the whole of the Act including the preamble and what are known as the “covering clauses” as well as the “Constitution proper”. As we will be spending an entire semester with this document, just a quick read through will suffice at this stage. If you don’t have a printed edition of the Constitution you can find it online via the usual channels (e.g. Commlaw, Austlii, etc.). 3. Marbury v Madison 5 US (1 Cranch) 137 (1803) extracted in Casebook pp 71- 74. Reading the casebook extract will suffice for present purposes but if you want to read the entire reported decision you can find it online at https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/5/137/case.html 1 4. Amalgamated Society of Engineers v Adelaide Steamship Co Ltd (1920) 28 CLR 129. This case has been described as “probably … the most important case in Australian constitutional law” so please read the whole of the reported decision if you can. (NB By this I mean all the judgments in the case; I do not expect you to read the summary of counsel’s arguments also reported in the CLRs.) If you are still in possession of The Australian Constitution in Context by Katherine Lindsay and Joseph Wenta from earlier in your law studies you may want to reread pp 112-117 of that book to refamiliarise yourself with some of the issues in the case). b) Fundamental Principles of Australian Constitutional Law using the Trade and Commerce power (s. 51(i)) as an illustration 1. Casebook 1452-1475, especially a) R v Commonwealth Conciliation and Arbitration Commission; ex parte Professional Engineers (1959) 107 CLR 208 (Casebook 1452)
b) Grain Pool of Western Australia v Commonwealth (2000) 202 CLR 479 (Casebook 1453, 1455) c) Nolan v Minister for Immigration & Ethnic Affairs (1988) 165 CLR 178 (Casebook 1454)
d) Actors and Announcers Equity Association of Australia v Fontana Films Pty Ltd (1982) 150 CLR 169 (Casebook 1456)
e) R v Barger (1908) 6 CLR 41 (Casebook 1459)
f) Nationwide News Pty Ltd v Wills (1992) 177 CLR 1 (Casebook 1462)
g) Leask v Commonwealth (1996) 187 CLR 579 (Casebook 1467, 1468)
h) Acts Interpretation Act 1901 (Cth) s. 15A (Casebook 1472)
i) Victoria v Commonwealth (Industrial Relations Act Case) (1996) 187 CLR 416 (Casebook 1473)
j) New South Wales v Commonwealth (Work Choices Case) (2006) 229 CLR 1 (Casebook 1474) 2. Casebook 439-455, especially
a) W & A McArthur Ltd v Queensland (1920) 28 CLR 530 (Casebook 440)
b) Australian National Airways Pty Ltd v Commonwealth (1945) 71 CLR 29 (Casebook 441)
c) MurphyoresInc Pty Ltd v Commonwealth (1976) 136 CLR 1 (Casebook 446) d) R v Burgess, ex parte Henry (1936) 55 CLR 608 (Casebook 448)
e) Airlines of New South Wales Pty Ltd v New South Wales (No. 2) (1965) 113 CLR 54. (Casebook 450) 2 RECOMMENDED ADDITIONAL READING a) Introduction to Australian Constitutional Law 1. Richard Ekins and David Tomkins “Constitutional Theory for the Constitutional Review” (2013, Maxim Institute discussion paper), especially sections 2-6 (be sure to read the footnotes as well as they contain useful discussion), available here: http://www.maxim.org.nz/Policy_and_Research/Constitutional_Theory_for_t he_Constitutional_Review. (Sections 1, 7 and 8 are more directly related to the New Zealand context but you are welcome to read these sections as well). 2. The Constitution of the United States of America (1787). This is available online at http://www.usconstitution.net/xconst.html. The US Constitution is particularly worthy of your attention because of (1) its influence on the drafters of the Australian Constitution, and (2) the role that constitutional case law of the US Supreme Court has played and still plays in Australian constitutional argument. 3. Casebook chapter 1 (pp 3-107), esppp 4-41. The whole chapter repays careful reading but I realise it’s long so those of you wishing to get the most important bits turn to pp 4-41. 4. Zines chapter 1 b) Fundamental Principles of Australian Constitutional Law using the Trade and Commerce power (s. 51(i)) as an illustration 1. Casebook 1357-1452 (i.e. that part of Chapter 14 not already in the prescribed reading). 2. Zines Chapters 2 and 3 WEEK 2: Fundamental Principles of Australian Constitutional Law using the Trade and Commerce power (s. 51(i)) as an illustration (cont’d) REQUIRED READING Casebook 456-504, especially a) Minister for Justice (WA) (ex relAnsett Transport Industries (Operations) Pty Ltd) v Australian National Airlines Commission (1976) 138 CLR 492. (Casebook 456)
b) Mason, “The Australian Constitution: 1901-1988” (1988) 62 ALJ 752 (Casebook 463) c) United States v Wrightwood Dairy Co 315 US 110 (1942) (Casebook 464)
d) O’Sullivan v Noarlunga Meat Ltd (1954) 92 CLR 565 (Casebook 466)
e) O’Sullivan v Noarlunga Meat Ltd (No. 2) (1956) 94 CLR 367 (Casebook 468) 3 f) Swift Australian Co (Pty) Ltd v Boyd Parkinson (1962) 108 CLR 189 (Casebook 470) g) Redfern v Dunlop Rubber Australia Ltd (1964) 110 CLR 194 (Casebook 471)
h) Pape v Commissioner of Taxation (2009) 238 CLR 1 (Casebook 473)
i) R v Smithers, ex parte McMillan (1982) 152 CLR 477, 485 (Casebook 471) j) ‘The United States Commerce Clause’, esp United States v Lopez (Casebook 476)
k) United States v Morrison 529 US 598 (2000) (Casebook 480)
l) National Federation of Independent Business v Sebelius 132 S Ct 2566 (2012). (Casebook 493) RECOMMENDED ADDITIONAL READING: 1. BGW, [4.8]-[4.59] (trade and commerce), [4.60]-[4.67] (severance). 2. Zines, chapter 4 WEEK 3: Inconsistency (s. 109) REQUIRED READING Casebook, Chapter 4, especially a) R v Licensing Court of Brisbane; ex parte Daniell (1920) 28 CLR 23. (Casebook 386) b) Clyde Engineering Co. Ltd v Cowburn (1926) 37 CLR 466.(Casebook 387 and 389) c) Colvin v Bradley Bros Pty Ltd (1943) 68 CLR 151.(Casebook 387)
d) Ex parte McLean (1930) 43 CLR 472. (Casebook 390) e) Ansett Transport Industries (Operations) Pty Ltd v Wardley (1980) 142 CLR 237. (Casebook 393 and 401)
f) O’Sullivan v Noarlunga Meat Ltd (1954) 92 CLR 565.(Casebook 397)
g) Western Australia v Commonwealth (Native Title Act case) (1995) 183 CLR 373. (Casebook 408) h) University of Wollongong v Metwally (1984) 158 CLR 447. (Casebook 413) i) Jemena Asset Management v Coinvest (2011) 244 CLR 508.(Casebook 422) j) Stock Motor Ploughs v Forsythe (1932) 48 CLR 128.(Casebook 429)
k) Dickson v The Queen (2010) 241 CLR 491. (Casebook 431) l) Victoria v Commonwealth (the Kakariki) (1937) 58 CLR 618. (Casebook 438) RECOMMENDED ADDITIONAL READING: 1. BGW, [3.14]-[3.21] and [13.1]-[13.23]. 4 2. G Lindell, “Grappling with inconsistency between Commonwealth and State legislation and the link with statutory interpretation” (2005) 8 Constitutional Law and Policy Review 25. 3. Zines, 583-586.

This essay only covers the first three weeks of material covered in the course and nothing else. This includes, fundamental principles, trade and commerce power and inconsistency. Do not consider Corporations Power for this problem question.

Please rely solely on the reading guide provided below.

Please note the following abbreviations are used:
Casebook = P. Gerangelos et al Winterton’s Australian Federal Constitutional Law:
Commentary and Materials (3rdedn 2013)
BGW = Keven Booker, Arthur Glass and Robert Watt Federal Constitutional Law: An
Introduction (2ndedn 1998)
Zines = Leslie Zines The High Court and the Constitution (5thedn 2008)

WEEK 1: Introduction to Australian Constitutional Law and Fundamental Principles of Australian Constitutional Law Using the Trade & Commerce Power (s. 51(i)) as an Illustration.
REQUIRED READING
a) Introduction to Australian Constitutional Law
1. BGW Chapter 2 (pp 9-27), available via short loans online.
This is necessary background knowledge, not demanding analytical reading. Every student of the Australian constitution should know this material so do be sure to read it but don’t spend too long on it.
2. Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act 1900 (Imp).
Please read the whole of the Act including the preamble and what are known as the “covering clauses” as well as the “Constitution proper”. As we will be spending an entire semester with this document, just a quick read through will suffice at this stage. If you don’t have a printed edition of the Constitution you can find it online via the usual channels (e.g. Commlaw, Austlii, etc.).
3. Marbury v Madison 5 US (1 Cranch) 137 (1803) extracted in Casebook pp 71- 74. Reading the casebook extract will suffice for present purposes but if you want to read the entire reported decision you can find it online at https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/5/137/case.html

1
4. Amalgamated Society of Engineers v Adelaide Steamship Co Ltd (1920) 28 CLR 129. This case has been described as “probably … the most important case in Australian constitutional law” so please read the whole of the reported decision if you can. (NB By this I mean all the judgments in the case; I do not expect you to read the summary of counsel’s arguments also reported in the CLRs.) If you are still in possession of The Australian Constitution in Context by Katherine Lindsay and Joseph Wenta from earlier in your law studies you may want to reread pp 112-117 of that book to refamiliarise yourself with some of the issues in the case).
b) Fundamental Principles of Australian Constitutional Law using the Trade and Commerce power (s. 51(i)) as an illustration
1. Casebook 1452-1475, especially
a) R v Commonwealth Conciliation and Arbitration Commission; ex parte Professional Engineers (1959) 107 CLR 208 (Casebook 1452)
b) Grain Pool of Western Australia v Commonwealth (2000) 202 CLR 479 (Casebook 1453, 1455)
c) Nolan v Minister for Immigration & Ethnic Affairs (1988) 165 CLR 178 (Casebook 1454)
d) Actors and Announcers Equity Association of Australia v Fontana Films Pty Ltd (1982) 150 CLR 169 (Casebook 1456)
e) R v Barger (1908) 6 CLR 41 (Casebook 1459)
f) Nationwide News Pty Ltd v Wills (1992) 177 CLR 1 (Casebook 1462)
g) Leask v Commonwealth (1996) 187 CLR 579 (Casebook 1467, 1468)
h) Acts Interpretation Act 1901 (Cth) s. 15A (Casebook 1472)
i) Victoria v Commonwealth (Industrial Relations Act Case) (1996) 187 CLR 416 (Casebook 1473)
j) New South Wales v Commonwealth (Work Choices Case) (2006) 229 CLR 1 (Casebook 1474)

2. Casebook 439-455, especially
a) W & A McArthur Ltd v Queensland (1920) 28 CLR 530 (Casebook 440)
b) Australian National Airways Pty Ltd v Commonwealth (1945) 71 CLR 29 (Casebook 441)
c) MurphyoresInc Pty Ltd v Commonwealth (1976) 136 CLR 1 (Casebook 446) d) R v Burgess, ex parte Henry (1936) 55 CLR 608 (Casebook 448)
e) Airlines of New South Wales Pty Ltd v New South Wales (No. 2) (1965) 113 CLR 54. (Casebook 450)
2
RECOMMENDED ADDITIONAL READING
a) Introduction to Australian Constitutional Law
1. Richard Ekins and David Tomkins “Constitutional Theory for the Constitutional Review” (2013, Maxim Institute discussion paper), especially sections 2-6 (be sure to read the footnotes as well as they contain useful discussion), available here: http://www.maxim.org.nz/Policy_and_Research/Constitutional_Theory_for_t he_Constitutional_Review. (Sections 1, 7 and 8 are more directly related to the New Zealand context but you are welcome to read these sections as well).
2. The Constitution of the United States of America (1787). This is available online at http://www.usconstitution.net/xconst.html. The US Constitution is particularly worthy of your attention because of (1) its influence on the drafters of the Australian Constitution, and (2) the role that constitutional case law of the US Supreme Court has played and still plays in Australian constitutional argument.
3. Casebook chapter 1 (pp 3-107), esppp 4-41. The whole chapter repays careful reading but I realise it’s long so those of you wishing to get the most important bits turn to pp 4-41.
4. Zines chapter 1
b) Fundamental Principles of Australian Constitutional Law using the Trade and Commerce power (s. 51(i)) as an illustration
1. Casebook 1357-1452 (i.e. that part of Chapter 14 not already in the prescribed reading).
2. Zines Chapters 2 and 3

WEEK 2: Fundamental Principles of Australian Constitutional Law using the Trade and Commerce power (s. 51(i)) as an illustration (cont’d)
REQUIRED READING
Casebook 456-504, especially
a) Minister for Justice (WA) (ex relAnsett Transport Industries (Operations) Pty Ltd) v Australian National Airlines Commission (1976) 138 CLR 492. (Casebook 456)
b) Mason, “The Australian Constitution: 1901-1988” (1988) 62 ALJ 752 (Casebook 463)
c) United States v Wrightwood Dairy Co 315 US 110 (1942) (Casebook 464)
d) O’Sullivan v Noarlunga Meat Ltd (1954) 92 CLR 565 (Casebook 466)
e) O’Sullivan v Noarlunga Meat Ltd (No. 2) (1956) 94 CLR 367 (Casebook 468)

3
f) Swift Australian Co (Pty) Ltd v Boyd Parkinson (1962) 108 CLR 189 (Casebook 470) g) Redfern v Dunlop Rubber Australia Ltd (1964) 110 CLR 194 (Casebook 471)
h) Pape v Commissioner of Taxation (2009) 238 CLR 1 (Casebook 473)
i) R v Smithers, ex parte McMillan (1982) 152 CLR 477, 485 (Casebook 471)
j) ‘The United States Commerce Clause’, esp United States v Lopez (Casebook 476)
k) United States v Morrison 529 US 598 (2000) (Casebook 480)
l) National Federation of Independent Business v Sebelius 132 S Ct 2566 (2012). (Casebook 493)
RECOMMENDED ADDITIONAL READING:
1. BGW, [4.8]-[4.59] (trade and commerce), [4.60]-[4.67] (severance).
2. Zines, chapter 4

WEEK 3: Inconsistency (s. 109)
REQUIRED READING
Casebook, Chapter 4, especially
a) R v Licensing Court of Brisbane; ex parte Daniell (1920) 28 CLR 23. (Casebook 386) b) Clyde Engineering Co. Ltd v Cowburn (1926) 37 CLR 466.(Casebook 387 and 389) c) Colvin v Bradley Bros Pty Ltd (1943) 68 CLR 151.(Casebook 387)
d) Ex parte McLean (1930) 43 CLR 472. (Casebook 390)
e) Ansett Transport Industries (Operations) Pty Ltd v Wardley (1980) 142 CLR 237. (Casebook 393 and 401)
f) O’Sullivan v Noarlunga Meat Ltd (1954) 92 CLR 565.(Casebook 397)
g) Western Australia v Commonwealth (Native Title Act case) (1995) 183 CLR 373. (Casebook 408)
h) University of Wollongong v Metwally (1984) 158 CLR 447. (Casebook 413) i) Jemena Asset Management v Coinvest (2011) 244 CLR 508.(Casebook 422) j) Stock Motor Ploughs v Forsythe (1932) 48 CLR 128.(Casebook 429)
k) Dickson v The Queen (2010) 241 CLR 491. (Casebook 431)
l) Victoria v Commonwealth (the Kakariki) (1937) 58 CLR 618. (Casebook 438)
RECOMMENDED ADDITIONAL READING:
1. BGW, [3.14]-[3.21] and [13.1]-[13.23].

4
2. G Lindell, “Grappling with inconsistency between Commonwealth and State legislation and the link with statutory interpretation” (2005) 8 Constitutional Law and Policy Review 25.
3. Zines, 583-586.

Click here to have a similar A+ quality paper

Order Now