Back to notes
What change in approach did the High Court take in the Coal and Whitfield decision of 1988?
Press to flip
The Court focused on the section as ensuring freedom from discriminatory protectionist burdens.
Describe the High Court's reasoning for upholding the Tasmanian law in Coal and Whitfield.
The High Court reasoned that the law was not aimed at protecting local businesses at the expense of interstate commerce.
What did the High Court conclude about the Tasmanian Fisheries Act in Coal and Whitfield?
The High Court concluded it was valid and not discriminatory against interstate trade.
Why was the Tasmanian regulation not considered a protectionist barrier in the Coal and Whitfield case?
Because the law was aimed at local conservation measures, not at impeding interstate commerce.
What is meant by a 'discriminatory burden of a protectionist kind' in the context of Section 92?
Burdens that discriminate against one state to favor and protect local businesses over interstate competition.
How might Section 92 impact state border closures during pandemics?
State border closures could be challenged as impeding interstate trade and movement, with arguments based on Section 92.
What was the initial interpretation of Section 92 of the Australian Constitution according to the High Court?
Section 92 was initially interpreted as an individual right.
How has the interpretation of Section 92 evolved over time according to the lecture?
The interpretation shifted from an individual right focus to preventing discriminatory trade barriers.
What was the regulatory requirement Whitfield was alleged to have violated?
Possession of undersized crayfish as per Tasmanian law, despite being compliant with South Australian regulations.
What was the central question in the Coal and Whitfield case regarding Section 92?
Whether the Tasmanian law imposed a burden contrary to Section 92's protection of interstate trade and commerce.
Identify the two limbs of Section 92 of the Australian Constitution.
Section 92 consists of the trade and commerce limb and the intercourse limb.
What regulation did Whitfield challenge under Tasmanian law?
Whitfield challenged Regulation 31(1)(d) of the Fisheries Act 1959, which required minimum sizes for crayfish.
What factors determine the validity of a law under Section 92 of the constitution?
The law's validity depends on whether it imposes non-discriminatory trade burdens.
What is the primary purpose of Section 92 according to the High Court's interpretation in Coal and Whitfield?
To ensure a free trade area across the Commonwealth by preventing discriminatory protectionist measures.
How does the Free Trade Theory interpret Section 92?
The Free Trade Theory ensures freedom from discriminatory protectionist burdens across different states.
Previous
Next