Question 1
According to the High Court, what is the primary focus of Section 92 of the Australian Constitution?
Question 2
What does the High Court's approach reveal about balancing state policies and federal trade freedoms?
Question 3
Which constitutional section was at the core of the Coal and Whitfield case?
Question 4
What was Whitfield's legal argument against the Tasmanian law?
Question 5
How did the High Court's decision in Coal and Whitfield shift the interpretation of Section 92?
Question 6
What did the Fisheries Act 1959 in Tasmania regulate in the Coal and Whitfield case?
Question 7
What does a 'discriminatory burden of a protectionist kind' refer to?
Question 8
Why did Whitfield's compliance with South Australian regulations not exempt him from Tasmanian laws?
Question 9
What is an example of a non-discriminatory burden that could still affect interstate trade?
Question 10
How does the Coal and Whitfield case interpret the 'free trade theory' under Section 92?
Question 11
What does Section 92's guarantee of 'freedom of interstate trade' primarily protect against?
Question 12
What is the significance of separating the 'trade and commerce limb' from the 'intercourse limb' in Section 92?
Question 13
What were the minimum size requirements for crayfish set by Tasmanian Regulation 31(1)(d)?
Question 14
Which limb of Section 92 would most likely be affected by state border closures during a pandemic?
Question 15
What was the High Court's reasoning for upholding the Tasmanian law?