Pushing the boundaries of executive power - Pape, the prerogative and nationhood powers

Melbourne University Law Review

Volumn 34, Issue 1, 2010, Pages 313-343

  Twomey, Anne ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SYDNEY   (Australia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84857090443     PISSN: 00258938     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (278)

1. (2009) 238 CLR 1.
2. A-G (Vic) ex rel Dale v Commonwealth (1945) 71 CLR 237, 254 (Latham CJ), 273 (McTiernan J) ('Pharmaceutical Benefits Case');
3. Vi ct oria v Commonwealth (1975) 134 CLR 338, 367-9 (McTiernan J), 396 (Mason J), 417 (Murphy J) ('AAP Case').
4. Pharmaceutical Benefits Case (1945) 71 CLR 237, 266 (Starke J), 271 (Dixon J), 282 (Williams J);
5. AAP Case (1975) 134 CLR 338, 360-3 (Barwick CJ), 373-4 (Gibbs J).
6. See, eg, AAP Case (1975) 134 CLR 338, 355-8 (Barwick CJ), 374 (Gibbs J).
7. See, eg, Davis v Commonwealth (1988) 166 CLR 79, 110 (Brennan J) ('Davis').
8. (2009) 238 CLR 1, 55 [111] (French CJ), 73-4 [178]-[183] (Gummow, Crennan and Bell JJ), 113 [320] (Hayne and Kiefel JJ), 210-11 [601]-[602] (Heydon J).
9. '[I]t is now settled that [ss 81 and 83 of the Constitution]... do not confer a substantive spending power and that the power to expend appropriated moneys must be found elsewhere in the Constitution or the laws of the Commonwealth': ICM Agriculture Pty Ltd v Commonwealth (2009) 240 CLR 140, 169 (French CJ, Gummow and Crennan JJ) (citations omitted).
10. The legislation in question was the Tax Bonus for Working Australians Act [No 2] 2009 (Cth) (' Bonus Act ').
11. Pape (2009) 238 CLR 1, 23-4 [8]-[9], 63-4 [133]-[134] (French CJ), 91-2 [241]-[243] (Gummow, Crennan and Bell JJ).
12. Official Report of the National Australasian Convention Debates, Sydney, 6 April 1891, 777.
13. See Official Report of the National Australasian Convention Debates, Adelaide, 19 April 1897, 908-9. Note George Reid's recognition that the prerogatives attached to nationhood, such as the power of making war or peace, would not transfer to the Commonwealth at that time: at 908-9. It was anticipated by Joseph Carruthers that prerogatives could instead be 'assigned' to the Governor-General by the Queen under s 2 of the Constitution: at 914.
14. (2009) 238 CLR 1, 60 [126]-[127]. Note that there are also executive powers derived from other sections of the Constitution, such as ss 72 and 119.
15. Commonwealth v Colonial Combing, Spinning and Weaving Co Ltd (1922) 31 CLR 421, 432 (Knox CJ and Gavan Duffy J). On execution
16. see generally George Winterton, 'The Relationship between Commonwealth Legislative and Executive Power' (2004) 25 Adelaide Law Review 21, 25.
17. st ed, 1765) vol 1, 232;
18. H W R Wade, 'Procedure and Prerogative in Public Law' (1985) 101 Law Quarterly Review 180, 191.
19. th ed, 1959) 424-6, where the prerogative was interpreted as including capacities.
20. Note the argument as to whether immunities and/or privileges are legitimately characterised as prerogatives, or whether they are simply a consequence of the existence of prerogative powers: B V Harris, 'Replacement of the Royal Prerogative in New Zealand' (2009) 23 New Zealand Universities Law Review 285, 293-4;
21. rd ed, 2007) 628-30;
22. Margit Cohn, 'Medieval Chains, Invisible Inks: On Non-Statutory Powers of the Executive' (2005) 25 Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 97, 105-6.
23. This category has been given various descriptors in the academic literature, including the 'common law powers of the Crown': George Winterton, Parliament, the Executive and the Governor-General: A Constitutional Analysis (Melbourne University Press, 1983) 44-5;
24. the 'spurious prerogatives': Wade, above n 23, 198;
25. the 'third source' of authority for government action: B V Harris, 'The "Third Source" of Authority for Government Action' (1992) 109 Law Quarterly Review 626, 626;
26. 'secondary prerogatives': Christopher Vincenzi, Crown Powers, Subjects and Citizens (Pinter, 1998) 15;
27. A similar distinction between prerogative powers and the capacities of the Crown was drawn by Brennan J in Davis (1988) 166 CLR 79, 108. It is now regarded as orthodox in Australia:
28. Simon Evans, 'Continuity and Flexibility: Executive Power in Australia' in Paul Craig and Adam Tomkins (eds), The Executive and Public Law: Power and Accountability in Comparative Perspective (Oxford University Press, 2006) 89, 93.
29. Pape (2009) 238 CLR 1, 60 [127].
30. Cf Re Ditfort; Ex parte Deputy Commissioner of Taxation (1988) 19 FCR 347, 369 (Gummow J), where it was stated that 'with questions arising in federal jurisdiction, one looks not to the content of the prerogative in Britain, but rather to s 61 of the Constitution'.
31. rd ed, 2010) 157.
32. Pape (2009) 238 CLR 1, 63 [133] (French CJ), 91-2 [242] (Gummow, Crennan and Bell JJ).
33. See, eg, Winterton, Parliament, the Executive and the Governor-General, above n 25, 40-4;
34. nd ed, 1997) 130-1;
35. th ed, 2007) 209;
36. th ed, 2006) 534-45;
37. th ed, 2009) 1034-7;
38. th ed, 2008) 414-15, where it is referred to as the 'implied national power'.
39. (1951) 83 CLR 1, 187
40. quoted in Pape (2009) 238 CLR 1, 24 [10] (French CJ), 171 [497] (Heydon J).
41. See Qarase v Bainimarama [2008] FJHC 241 (9 October 2008) [1], [4] (Gates A C J, Byrne and Pathik JJ).
42. See also Anne Twomey, 'The Fijian Coup Cases: The Constitution, Reserve Powers and the Doctrine of Necessity' (2009) 83 Australian Law Journal 319.
43. Qarase v Bainimarama [2008] FJHC 241 (9 October 2008) [149] (Gates A C J, Byrne and Pathik JJ).
44. Qarase v Bainimarama [2009] FJCA 9 (9 April 2009) [94] (Powell, Lloyd and Douglas J J A).
45. Pape (2009) 238 CLR 1, 193 [552].
46. Winterton, 'The Relationship between Commonwealth Legislative and Executive Power', above n 22, 33.
47. See also Lane's description of the nationhood power as 'dangerous', 'shadowy' and 'will-o'-the-wisp': Lane, above n 32, 130-1.
48. Winterton, 'The Relationship between Commonwealth Legislative and Executive Power', above n 22, 35. Similar criticisms have been made of the 'inherent' executive power recognised by the Irish Supreme Court in the absence of prerogative powers:
49. Harris, 'Replacement of the Royal Prerogative in New Zealand', above n 24, 306.
50. British Broadcasting Corporation v Johns [1965] Ch 32, 79 (Diplock LJ).
51. See, eg, R v Secretary of State for the Home Department; Ex parte Northumbria Police Authority [1989] 1 QB 26;
52. Winterton, Parliament, the Executive and the Governor-General, above n 25, 120;
53. A-G (UK) v de Keyser's Royal Hotel Ltd [1920] AC 508;
54. Ruddock v Vadarlis (2001) 110 FCR 491, 501-4 [33]-[40] (Black CJ), 539-40 [181]-[182] (French J);
55. Cadia Holdings Pty Ltd v New South Wales [2010] HCA 27 (25 August 2010) [14] (French CJ), [94] (Gummow, Hayne, Heydon and Crennan JJ).
56. Council of Civil Service Unions v Minister for the Civil Service [1985] AC 374;
57. Minister for the Arts, Heritage and Environment v Peko-Wallsend Ltd (1987) 15 FCR 274;
58. R (Bancoult) v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs [No 2] [2009] 1 AC 453 ('Bancoult').
59. Case of Proclamations (1611) 12 Co Rep 74;
60. 77 ER 1352;
61. Davis (1988) 166 CLR 79, 112 (Brennan J).
62. See also Pfeiffer v Stevens (2001) 209 CLR 57, 89-90 [118] (Kirby J).
63. Bill of Rights 1688 (Eng) 1 Wm & M sess 2, c2, art 4;
64. Bowles v Bank of England [1913] 1 Ch 57, 84-5 (Parker J);
65. Commonwealth v Colonial Combing, Spinning and Weaving Co Ltd (1922) 31 CLR 421, 433-4 (Isaacs J).
66. Vestey v Inland Revenue Commissioners [1980] AC 1148, 1195 (Lord Edmund-Davies);
67. A v Hayden (1984) 156 CLR 532, 580-2 (Brennan J);
68. Ridgeway v The Queen (1995) 184 CLR 19, 54 (Brennan J).
69. Simon Evans, 'The Rule of Law, Constitutionalism and the MV Tampa' (2002) 13 Public Law Review 94, 99.
70. See also Winterton, 'The Relationship between Commonwealth Legislative and Executive Power', above n 22, 35-6;
71. British Broadcasting Corporation v Johns [1965] Ch 32, 79 (Diplock LJ);
72. R v Secretary of State for the Home Department; Ex parte Fire Brigades Union [1995] 2 AC 513;
73. Bancoult [2009] 1 AC 453, 490-2 [69]-[71] (Lord Bingham).
74. See, eg, Rodney Brazier, 'Constitutional Reform and the Crown' in Maurice Sunkin and Sebastian Payne (eds), The Nature of the Crown: A Legal and Political Analysis (Oxford University Press, 1999) 337, 356-8;
75. Cohn, above n 24, 102-3.
76. See also, regarding New Zealand: Harris, 'Replacement of the Royal Prerogative in New Zealand', above n 24, 287-8, 313.
77. United Kingdom, The Governance of Britain, Cm 7170(2007) 17: 'The Government believes that in general the prerogative powers should be put onto a statutory basis and brought under stronger parliamentary scrutiny and control.'
78. Cf Winterton's conceptualisation of the 'breadth' and 'depth' of executive power: Winterton, Parliament, the Executive and the Governor-General, above n 25, 38-49. Note Saunders' criticism that the High Court in Pape did not clearly distinguish between the breadth and depth of executive power:
79. Cheryl Saunders, 'The Sources and Scope of the Commonwealth Power to Spend' (2009) 20 Public Law Review 256, 261-2.
80. Commonwealth v Colonial Combing, Spinning and Weaving Co Ltd (1922) 31 CLR 421, 453-4 (Higgins J).
81. See H e Renfree, The Executive Power of the Commonwealth of Australia (Legal Books, 1984) 415-22;
82. Zines, The High Court and the Constitution, above n 32, 342-3.
83. See also Barton v Commonwealth (1974) 131 CLR 477, 498 (Mason J);
84. Cadia Holdings Pty Ltd v New South Wales [2010] HCA 27 (25 August 2010) [31] (French CJ).
85. Bonanza Creek Gold Mining Co Ltd v The King [1916] 1 AC 566, 587 (Viscount Haldane for Lord Buckmaster LC, Viscount Haldane, Lords Parker and Sumner) (regarding the distribution of powers in Canada);
86. Joseph v Colonial Treasurer (NSW) (1918) 25 CLR 32, 46-7 (Isaacs, Powers and Rich JJ);
87. Federal Commissioner of Taxation v Official Liquidator of e O Farley Ltd (in liq) (1940) 63 CLR 278, 320-2 (Evatt J);
88. AAP Case (1975) 134 CLR 338, 362 (Barwick CJ), 379 (Gibbs J), 396-7 (Mason J).
89. See also A-G (Vic) ex rel Victorian Chamber of Manufactures v Commonwealth (1935) 52 CLR 533, 567 (Starke J).
90. Federal Commissioner of Taxation v Official Liquidator of e O Farley Ltd (1940) 63 CLR 278, 320-1 (Evatt J);
91. Cadia Holdings Pty Ltd v New South Wales [2010] HCA 27 (25 August 2010) [30]-[34] (French CJ), [86]-[89] (Gummow, Hayne, Heydon and Crennan JJ);
92. H V Evatt, The Royal Prerogative (Law Book, 1987) 220-38; Lane, above n 32, 437-8.
93. New South Wales v Bardolph (1934) 52 CLR 455, 474-5 (Evatt J), 496 (Rich J), 502 (Starke J), 509 (Dixon J).
94. Ansett Transport Industries (Operations) Pty Ltd v Commonwealth (1977) 139 CLR 54, 61 (Barwick CJ), 113 (Aickin J).
95. Town Investments Ltd v Department of the Environment [1978] AC 359.
96. Note that the power to spend, while related to the power to contract, is limited to expenditure authorised by the Parliament through a valid appropriation: Zines, The High Court and the Constitution, above n 32, 351.
97. See R (Hooper) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions [2006] 1 All ER 487;
98. R v Criminal Injuries Compensation Board; Ex parte P [1995] 1 All ER 870.
99. R v Secretary of State for Health; Ex parte C [2000] 1 FLR 627, 632 (Hale LJ);
100. Harris, 'The "Third Source" of Authority for Government Action', above n 25, 635-6;
101. F W Maitland, 'The Crown as Corporation' (1901) 17 Law Quarterly Review 131, 140;
102. Town Investments Ltd v Department of the Environment [1978] AC 359, 400 (Lord Simon).
103. Malone v Metropolitan Police Commissioner [1979] Ch 344, 366-7 (Megarry V-C). Note, however, the extensive criticism of this case:
104. see, eg, Zines, The High Court and the Constitution, above n 32, 356; Joseph, above n 24, 627-8;
105. Anthony Lester and Matthew Weait, 'The use of Ministerial Powers without Parliamentary Authority: The Ram Doctrine' [2003] Public Law 415, 421
106. see also the analysis of the Ram doctrine at 419-20
107. [2008] 3 All ER 548, 563 [48].
108. Victoria v Australian Building Construction Employees' and Builders Labourers' Federation (1982) 152 CLR 25, 156 (Brennan J);
109. Boath v Wyvill (1989) 85 ALR 621, 635 (Sheppard, Beaumont and Gummow JJ). Note, however, Zines' criticism of distinguishing between the 'governmental' and 'non-governmental' acts of governments:
110. Leslie Zines, 'The Inherent Executive Power of the Commonwealth' (2005) 16 Public Law Review 279, 283-4.
111. Enid Campbell, 'Commonwealth Contracts' (1970) 44 Australian Law Journal 14;
112. Enid Campbell, 'Federal Contract Law' (1970) 44 Australian Law Journal 580;
113. Winterton, Parliament, the Executive and the Governor-General, above n 25, 45-6.
114. See also Advisory Committee on Executive Government, Report of the Advisory Committee of the Constitutional Commission on Executive Government (The Commission, 1987) 54.
115. Zines, The High Court and the Constitution, above n 32, 349-58;
116. rd ed, 2004) 55-62.
117. See also J E Richardson, 'The Executive Power of the Commonwealth' in Leslie Zines (ed), Commentaries on the Australian Constitution: A Tribute to Geoffrey Sawer (Butterworths, 1977) 50, 74-5;
118. Moëns and Trone, above n 32, 244-5.
119. See Winterton, Parliament, the Executive and the Governor-General, above n 25, 98-101.
120. If a statute is to override, or authorise the executive to override, fundamental common law rights, then express words or a clear and unambiguous intention to do so is required: Potter v Minahan (1908) 7 CLR 277, 304 (O'Connor J).
121. See also Bropho v Western Australia (1990) 171 CLR 1, 18 (Mason CJ, Deane, Dawson, Toohey, Gaudron and McHugh JJ);
122. Coco v The Queen (1994) 179 CLR 427, 437-8 (Mason CJ, Brennan, Gaudron and McHugh JJ);
123. R v Secretary of State for the Home Department; Ex parte Simms [2000] 2 AC 115, 131 (Lord Hoffman);
124. R (Anufrijeva) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2004] 1 AC 604, 621 [27] (Lord Steyn);
125. and R (Jackson) v A-G (UK) [2006] 1 AC 262, 318 [159] (Baroness Hale).
126. British Coal Corporation v The King [1935] AC 500, 519 (Viscount Sankey LC for Viscount Sankey LC, Lords Atkin, Tomlin, Macmillan and Wright);
127. Barton v Commonwealth (1974) 131 CLR 477, 501 (Mason J);
128. R v Secretary of State for the Home Department; Ex parte Fire Brigades Union [1995] 2 AC 513, 552 (Lord Browne-Wilkinson).
129. Victorian Stevedoring and General Contracting Co Pty Ltd v Dignan (1931) 46 CLR 73.
130. Butterworths, Halsbury's Laws of England, vol 8 (at 31 May 1996) 2
131. Constitutional Law and Human Rights, '5 The Executive' [368];
132. Sebastian Payne, 'The Royal Prerogative' in Maurice Sunkin and Sebastian Payne (eds), The Nature of the Crown: A Legal and Political Analysis (Oxford University Press, 1999) 77, 78-9, 106-7.
133. British Broadcasting Corporation v Johns [1965] Ch 32, 79 (Diplock LJ).
134. See Bancoult [2009] 1 AC 453;
135. Anne Twomey, 'Fundamental Common Law Principles as Limitations upon Legislative Power' (2009) 9 Oxford University Commonwealth Law Journal 47, 54-6.
136. See also the analysis of that test in Harris, 'Replacement of the Royal Prerogative in New Zealand', above n 24, 290-2.
137. Zines, The High Court and the Constitution, above n 32, 345-6.
138. th century the prerogative has not empowered the Crown to change English common or statute law': Bancoult [2009] 1 AC 453, 485 [44]. While the Crown may not 'change' the common law, its prerogative acts may still override common law rights in some circumstances:
139. see, eg, Burmah Oil Co (Burma Trading) Ltd v Lord Advocate [1965] AC 75.
140. See Burns v Ransley (1949) 79 CLR 101;
141. R v Sharkey (1949) 79 CLR 121.
142. Meyer v Poynton (1920) 27 CLR 436, 441 (Starke J);
143. Davis (1988) 166 CLR 79, 112 (Brennan J);
144. Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs v Teoh (1995) 183 CLR 273, 286-7 (Mason CJ and Deane J).
145. Mark Elliott and Amanda Perreau-Saussine, 'Pyrrhic Public Law: Bancoult and the Sources, Status and Content of Common Law Limitations on Prerogative Power' [2009] Public Law 697, 705.
146. Bancoult [2009] 1 AC 453, 482-3 [35] (Lord Hoffman).
147. R (Shrewsbury and Atcham Borough Council) v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government [2008] 3 All ER 548, 570 [74] (Richards LJ).
148. See also Harris, 'Replacement of the Royal Prerogative in New Zealand', above n 24, 290.
149. Harris, 'The "Third Source" of Authority for Government Action', above n 25, 626-7. Note also the United Kingdom government's acknowledgement that legislation is required for 'the imposition of legal obligations, the creation of offences, or the raising of taxes':
150. United Kingdom, Parliamentary Debates, House of Lords, 24 March 2003, vol 646, col WA 59-60.
151. Cf ICM Agriculture Pty Ltd v Commonwealth (2009) 240 CLR 140, 166 (French CJ, Gummow and Crennan JJ) where it was noted that s 51 (xxxix) had been used to create offences to support the making of grants under the non-coercive s 96 of the Constitution.
152. See le Mesurier v Connor (1929) 42 CLR 481, 497-8 (Knox CJ, Rich and Dixon JJ);
153. Burton v Honan (1952) 86 CLR 169, 177-8 (Dixon CJ);
154. Davis (1988) 166 CLR 79, 111-12 (Brennan J);
155. Cheryl Saunders, 'Intergovernmental Agreements and the Executive Power' (2005) 16 Public Law Review 294, 310.
156. (1975) 134 CLR 338, 397.
157. See also New South Wales v Commonwealth (1975) 135 CLR 337, 373-4 (Barwick CJ), regarding national control of the seabed and the continental shelf.
158. AAP Case (1975) 134 CLR 338, 398. Note that Mason J also pointed to s 96 of the Constitution as confirming 'that the executive power is not unlimited and that there is a very large area of activity which lies outside the executive power of the Commonwealth but which may become the subject of conditions attached to grants under s 96.'
159. (1983) 158 CLR 1, 252.
160. Davis (1988) 166 CLR 79, 94.
161. Davis (1988) 166 CLR 79, 104 (Wilson and Dawson JJ), 114 (Brennan J), 119 (Toohey J).
162. (2009) 238 CLR 1, 60 [127].
163. See also Re Wakim; Exparte McNally (1999) 198 CLR 511, 615 (Kirby J) (citations omitted): 'A characterisation of legislative purposes as "national" is not sufficient to attract the support of the nationhood power if those purposes fall within areas of law-making belonging to the States.'
164. Pape (2009) 238 CLR 1, 60 [127].
165. AAP Case (1975) 134 CLR 338, 405-6.
166. Pape (2009) 238 CLR 1, 83 [215] (Gummow, Crennan and Bell JJ).
167. (1949) 79 CLR 101.
168. (1949) 79 CLR 121.
169. (1951) 83 CLR 1.
170. Winterton, Parliament, the Executive and the Governor-General, above n 25, 32.
171. (1988) 166 CLR 79, 110.
172. See also the criticism by Heydon J that the phrase is not capable of definition: Pape (2009) 238 CLR 1, 190 [540].
173. Ruddock v Vadarlis (2001) 110 FCR 481, 539 [180].
174. (2009) 238 CLR 1, 60 [127].
175. AAP Case (1975) 134 CLR 338, 397.
176. Communist Party Case (1951) 83 CLR 1, 188 (Dixon J).
177. nd ed, 1897) 340.
178. See, eg, R v Kidman (1915) 20 CLR 425, 440 (Isaacs J).
179. See Kielley v Carson (1842) 4 Moo PC 63;
180. 13 ER 225;
181. Barton v Taylor [1886] 11 AC 197, 203 (Earl of Selborne for Earl of Selborne, Lords Blackburn, Monkswell, Hobhouse and Sir Richard Couch);
182. Willis v Perry (1912) 13 CLR 592.
183. Kielley v Carson (1842) 4 Moo PC 63, 88;
184. 13 ER 225, 234 (Parke B, for Lords Lyndhurst, Brougham, Denman, Abinger, Cottenham, Campbell, Sir Lancelot Shadwell, Sir N C Tindal, Parke B, Erskine J and Dr Lushington).
185. Burmah Oil Co (Burma Trading) Ltd v Lord Advocate [1965] AC 75.
186. (1975) 134 CLR 338, 397.
187. (1949) 79 CLR 101, 110 (Latham CJ), 116 (Dixon J).
188. (1949) 79 CLR 121, 148 (Dixon J).
189. Davis (1988) 166 CLR 79, 103-4.
190. (2009) 238 CLR 1, 50 [95], 61 [129], 63 [133] (French CJ), 87-8 [228] (Gummow, Crennan and Bell JJ).
191. See Davis (1988) 166 CLR 79, 101-2 (Wilson and Dawson JJ).
192. Pape (2009) 238 CLR 1, 63 [133] (French CJ), 89 [232] (Gummow, Crennan and Bell JJ), 119 [337] (Hayne and Kiefel JJ).
193. AAP Case (1975) 134 CLR 338, 397 (Mason J).
194. Lange v Australian Broadcasting Corporation (1997) 189 CLR 520, 566-7 (Brennan CJ, Dawson, Toohey, Gaudron, McHugh, Gummow and Kirby JJ).
195. See, eg, Re Wakim; Ex parte McNally (1999) 198 CLR 511;
196. Austin v Commonwealth (2003) 215 CLR 185;
197. Australian Capital Television Pty Ltd v Commonwealth (1992) 177 CLR 106.
198. Pape (2009) 238 CLR 1, 120 [339] (Hayne and Kiefel JJ), 134 [397], 200-1 [576] (Heydon J).
199. See Burns v Ransley (1949) 79 CLR 101;
200. R v Sharkey (1949) 79 CLR 121;
201. Communist Party Case (1951) 83 CLR 1.
202. See Pape (2009) 238 CLR 1, 89 [233] (Gummow, Crennan and Bell JJ).
203. See Davis (1988) 166 CLR 79, 110-11 (Brennan J).
204. See R v Duncan; Ex parte Australian Iron and Steel Pty Ltd (1983) 158 CLR 535, 560 (Mason J).
205. See also R v Hughes (2000) 202 CLR 535, 554-5 [38] (Gleeson CJ, Gaudron, McHugh, Gummow, Hayne and Callinan JJ).
206. See Pharmaceutical Benefits Case (1945) 71 CLR 237, 257 (Latham CJ);
207. AAP Case (1975) 134 CLR 338, 397 (Mason J), 412 (Jacobs J).
208. See Pharmaceutical Benefits Case (1945) 71 CLR 237, 254 (Latham CJ);
209. AAP Case (1975) 134 CLR 338, 397 (Mason J), 419 (Murphy J);
210. Davis (1988) 166 CLR 79, 110-11 (Brennan J);
211. Pape (2009) 238 CLR 1, 50 [95] (French CJ).
212. See Zines, 'The Inherent Executive Power of the Commonwealth', above n 76, 289;
213. H P Lee, Emergency Powers (1984).
214. Note the debate as to whether this power extends beyond the prerogative: see Zines, 'The Inherent Executive Power of the Commonwealth', above n 76, 289-90.
215. R v Secretary of State for the Home Department; Ex parte Northumbria Police Authority [1989] 1 QB 26. Note Zines' criticism of this case and his hope that it would not be followed in Australia: ibid 287.
216. Burmah Oil Co (Burma Trading) Ltd v Lord Advocate [1965] AC 75, 115 (Viscount Radcliffe). Note, however, the relevance of s 119 of the Constitution and the right of the states to deal with domestic violence within a state until the aid of the Commonwealth is called upon.
217. See, eg, Chitty's discussion of the use of royal proclamations for appointing 'fasts' and 'days of thanksgiving and humiliation': Joseph Chitty, A Treatise on the Law of the Prerogatives of the Crown; and the Relative Duties and Rights of the Subject (Joseph Butterworth and Son, 1820) 105.
218. See, eg, P J Magennis Pty Ltd v Commonwealth (1949) 80 CLR 382, 410-11 (Dixon J), where his Honour acknowledged that the power to enter into an intergovernmental agreement is one vested in the Commonwealth government by the Constitution.
219. See also South Australia v Commonwealth (1962) 108 CLR 130, 149 (McTiernan J), 149 (Taylor J) regarding the similarities and differences between contracts and intergovernmental agreements;
220. Saunders, 'Intergovernmental Agreements and the Executive Power', above n 100, 306.
221. In some cases the Commonwealth may legislate to authorise the making of an agreement: see, eg, National Health Act 1953 (Cth) s 11;
222. Quarantine Act 1908 (Cth) s 11. Intergovernmental agreements may also be attached as a schedule to legislation:
223. see, eg, Financial Agreement Act 1994 (Cth) sch
224. (' Financial Agreement (1994) ').
225. See ICM Agriculture Pty Ltd v Commonwealth (2009) 240 CLR 140, 166 (French CJ, Gummow and Crennan JJ) and the discussion of the use of ss 96 and 51 (xxxix) to support legislation implementing an intergovernmental agreement.
226. R v Duncan; Ex parte Australian Iron and Steel Pty Ltd (1983) 158 CLR 535, 560 (Mason J);
227. R v Hughes (2000) 202 CLR 535, 554-5 [38] (Gleeson CJ, Gaudron, McHugh, Gummow, Hayne and Callinan JJ);
228. ICM Agriculture Pty Ltd v Commonwealth (2009) 240 CLR 140, 164-5 [29] (French CJ, Gummow and Crennan JJ). Note also the argument that the 'maintenance' of the Constitution imports intergovernmental cooperation and therefore supports intergovernmental agreements:
229. Saunders, 'Intergovernmental Agreements and the Executive Power', above n 100, 306.
230. In Clough v Leahy (1905) 2 CLR 139, 156-7, Griffith CJ concluded that the power to inquire falls within the capacities of the Crown as it is possessed by every person.
231. However, the grant of a royal commission by letters patent involves the exercise of the prerogative: McGuinness v A-G (Vic) (1940) 63 CLR 73, 93-4 (Dixon J);
232. Lockwood v Commonwealth (1954) 90 CLR 177, 185-6 (Fullagar J);
233. Victoria v Australian Building Construction Employees' and Builders Labourers' Federation (1982) 152 CLR 25, 88 (Mason J), 139 (Wilson J), 155-6 (Brennan J).
234. Lockwood v Commonwealth (1954) 90 CLR 177, 182 (Fullagar J).
235. See also A-G (Cth) v Colonial Sugar Refining Co Ltd (1913) 17 CLR 644, 655-6 (Viscount Haldane LC for Viscount Haldane LC, Lords Dunedin, Shaw and Moulton);
236. Ross v Costigan (1982) 41 ALR 319, 329-30 (Ellicott J).
237. A-G (Cth) v Colonial Sugar Refining Co Ltd (1913) 17 CLR 644, 655 (Viscount Haldane LC, for Lords Dunedin, Shaw and Moulton);
238. McGuinness v A-G (Vic) (1940) 63 CLR 73, 83, 91, 98-9 (Dixon J);
239. Ross v Costigan (1982) 41 ALR 319, 330 (Ellicott J);
240. Victoria v Australian Building Construction Employees' and Builders Labourers' Federation (1982) 152 CLR 25, 126 (Wilson J);
241. Herald & Weekly Times Ltd v Woodward [1995] 1 VR 156, 158 (Brooking J);
242. Egan v Willis (1998) 195 CLR 424, 472 (McHugh J).
243. Winterton, 'The Relationship between Commonwealth Legislative and Executive Power', above n 22, 28.
244. AAP Case (1975) 134 CLR 338, 362 (Barwick CJ).
245. See also Constitution s 64, which refers to the executive power to 'appoint officers to administer such departments of State of the Commonwealth as the Governor-General in Council may establish.'
246. While in the United Kingdom the civil service has operated for centuries on the basis of prerogative powers, it has recently been given a statutory basis for its management: Constitutional Reform and Governance Act 2010 (UK) c 25.
247. The CSIRO, the National Gallery of Australia and the National Museum of Australia are all Commonwealth authorities within the meaning of the Commonwealth Authorities and Companies Act 1997 (Cth) s 7.
248. See Science and Industry Research Act 1949 (Cth) s 8;
249. National Gallery Act 1975 (Cth) s 4;
250. National Museum of Australia Act 1980 (Cth) s 4.
251. See Pharmaceutical Benefits Case (1945) 71 CLR 237, 256-7 (Latham CJ).
252. 'There can be no objection in my opinion to the Commonwealth, in the absence of any statutory provisions, establishing parks, gardens, sports grounds, tourist facilities and the like upon land it possesses in Canberra': Johnson v Kent (1975) 132 CLR 164, 170 (Barwick CJ).
253. See, eg, Pape (2009) 238 CLR 1, 116 [329], where Hayne and Kiefel JJ raised the question, but did not determine, whether the establishment of the CSIRO could be supported by the patents power.
254. AAP Case (1975) 134 CLR 338, 397 (Mason J) (emphasis added).
255. (2009) 238 CLR 1, 89 [232].
256. Pharmaceutical Benefits Case (1945) 71 CLR 237, 254-5.
257. See United States Constitution art I § 8.1.
258. Pharmaceutical Benefits Case (1945) 71 CLR 237, 255 (Latham CJ)
259. citing United States v Butler, 297 US 1(1936);
260. Helvering v Davis, 301 US 619(1937);
261. and Charles C Steward Machine Co v Davis, 301 US 548(1937).
262. Pharmaceutical Benefits Case (1945) 71 CLR 237, 255.
263. (2009) 238 CLR 1, 90 [237]-[238].
264. See W R Moran Pty Ltd v Deputy Commissioner of Taxation (NSW) [1940] AC 838, 858 (Viscount Maugham for Viscount Maugham, Lords Atkin, Russell of Killoween, Wright and Porter).
265. Note also the High Court's finding in ICM Agriculture Pty Ltd v Commonwealth (2009) 240 CLR 140, 170 [46] (French CJ, Gummow and Crennan JJ), 206 [174] (Heydon J) that s 96 is subject to s 51 (xxxi). Hayne, Kiefel and Bell JJ considered it unnecessary to decide this point: at 199 [141].
266. See, eg, the dicta in Tasmanian Dam Case (1983) 158 CLR 1, 203-4 (Wilson J), 252-3 (Deane J).
267. See also Kirby J's comment that it is highly doubtful that the executive power or an implied nationhood power could support the serious and burdensome consequences of criminal proceedings: R v Hughes (2000) 202 CLR 535, 583 [119].
268. Davis (1988) 166 CLR 79, 112-13 (citations omitted).
269. (2009) 238 CLR 1, 182-3 [522] (Heydon J).
270. Davis (1988) 166 CLR 79, 99
271. citing Burns v Ransley (1949) 79 CLR 101.
272. Jeremy Kirk, 'Constitutional Guarantees, Characterisation and the Concept of Proportionality' (1997) 21 Melbourne University Law Review 1, 22.
273. See, eg, Communist Party Case (1951) 83 CLR 1, 273-4 (Kitto J).
274. See, eg, Victoria v Commonwealth (1996) 187 CLR 416, 487 (Brennan CJ, Toohey, Gaudron, McHugh and Gummow JJ).
275. See H P Lee, 'Proportionality in Australian Constitutional Adjudication' in Geoffrey Lindell (ed), Future Directions in Australian Constitutional Law: Essays in Honour of Professor Leslie Zines (Federation Press, 1994) 126, 136-40;
276. (1992) 177 CLR 1, 30.
277. (1996) 187 CLR 579, 605 (Dawson J), 616 (Gaudron J), 617-18 (McHugh J), 636 (Kirby J).
278. Pape (2009) 238 CLR 1, 64 [134].