R v Barger
Encyclopedia
R v Barger 6 CLR
41 is a High Court of Australia
case that considered the scope of the taxation power.
. It held that the Commonwealth's imposition of the fee was invalid because it was not pursuant to section 51(ii). The Substance of the Act was to regulate the conditions of manufacture, and that went beyond the power of section 51(ii).
The decision needs to be seen in light of its context. It was made before Engineers
swept away the doctrine of reserved State powers
. The reserved State powers doctrine was established and affirmed in earlier cases by the original High Court Bench (Griffith CJ, Barton and O'Connor JJ) who were the majority in this decision. The beginnings of the overturning of the doctrine were already evident in the dissenting decision of Isaacs and Higgins JJ. They held that neither the purpose nor the effects of the Act were a valid objection for the exercise of the taxation power. Simply because the law had another purpose did not mean that the law was not one with respect to taxation. The taxation power is a non-purposive power, hence any law that could be encapsulated under the subject matter of taxation would be valid under section 52(ii). The dissent also brought up the notion of dual-characterisation - that a law could be characterised several different ways. As long as at least one of the characterisations is pursuant to a head of power, the law would be constitutionally valid.
Commonwealth Law Reports
The Commonwealth Law Reports are the authorised reports of decisions of the High Court of Australia. The CLR are published by the Lawbook Company, a division of Thomson Reuters...
41 is a High Court of Australia
High Court of Australia
The High Court of Australia is the supreme court in the Australian court hierarchy and the final court of appeal in Australia. It has both original and appellate jurisdiction, has the power of judicial review over laws passed by the Parliament of Australia and the parliaments of the States, and...
case that considered the scope of the taxation power.
Facts
The Commonwealth government imposed taxes on the use of certain types of agricultural machinery. An exemption applied where the employment conditions of workers using the machinery were made pursuant to certain specified conditions. Barger did not operate pursuant to these conditions, and the Commonwealth sought back-payment of the taxes.Decision
The Court had to consider whether the Commonwealth had power to indirectly regulate the working conditions of workers under section 51(ii) of the Australian ConstitutionConstitution of Australia
The Constitution of Australia is the supreme law under which the Australian Commonwealth Government operates. It consists of several documents. The most important is the Constitution of the Commonwealth of Australia...
. It held that the Commonwealth's imposition of the fee was invalid because it was not pursuant to section 51(ii). The Substance of the Act was to regulate the conditions of manufacture, and that went beyond the power of section 51(ii).
The decision needs to be seen in light of its context. It was made before Engineers
Amalgamated Society of Engineers v Adelaide Steamship Co. Ltd.
Amalgamated Society of Engineers v Adelaide Steamship Co Ltd 28 CLR 129 was a landmark Australian court case decided in the High Court of Australia on 31 August 1920...
swept away the doctrine of reserved State powers
Reserved State powers
The reserved country powers, also called reserved powers, is a doctrine reserved exclusively for the states, that is used in the interpretation of the Constitution of Australia. It adopted a restrictive approach to the interpretation of the specific powers of the Federal Parliament in order to...
. The reserved State powers doctrine was established and affirmed in earlier cases by the original High Court Bench (Griffith CJ, Barton and O'Connor JJ) who were the majority in this decision. The beginnings of the overturning of the doctrine were already evident in the dissenting decision of Isaacs and Higgins JJ. They held that neither the purpose nor the effects of the Act were a valid objection for the exercise of the taxation power. Simply because the law had another purpose did not mean that the law was not one with respect to taxation. The taxation power is a non-purposive power, hence any law that could be encapsulated under the subject matter of taxation would be valid under section 52(ii). The dissent also brought up the notion of dual-characterisation - that a law could be characterised several different ways. As long as at least one of the characterisations is pursuant to a head of power, the law would be constitutionally valid.
See also
- Constitutional basis of taxation in AustraliaConstitutional basis of taxation in AustraliaThe constitutional basis of taxation in Australia is based on a group of powers in the Australian Constitution: sections 51, section 90, section 53, section 55, and section 96...
- Australian constitutional lawAustralian constitutional lawAustralian constitutional law is the area of the law of Australia relating to the interpretation and application of the Constitution of Australia. Several major doctrines of Australian constitutional law have developed....