Reading...
Play button
Play button
Use LEFT and RIGHT arrow keys to navigate between flashcards;
Use UP and DOWN arrow keys to flip the card;
H to show hint;
A reads text to speech;
10 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
|
R v Trade Practices Tribunal
|
Established that the nature of the corporation is determined by the purpose for which it was created.
Established that the current activities of the corporation be predominantly and characteristically in trading in goods and services. |
|
|
Adamson's Case
|
Established that the trading activities be 'substantial' or 'not insignificant' in the company's operations.
|
|
|
Huddart Parker v Moorehead
|
The High Court ruled that s51(xx) does not cover corporations engaged exclusively in trade within a single state. This conclusion was based partly on the reserved powers of the states.
|
|
|
Strickland v Rocla Concrete Pipes (Concrete Pipes Case)
|
Concerned provisions of the Trade Practices Act 1965-1968 (Cth) regarding anti-competitive conduct applied to a corporation trading exclusively within Queensland.
The High Court ruled that intra-state trading corporations were within Commonwealth power. |
|
|
State Superannuation Board v Trade Practices Commission (Superannuation Board Case)
|
The High Court ruled that a financial corporation is one that engages in commercial dealing in finance as a substantial part of its operation.
This stands as opposed to dealing in goods or services. Banks, building societies and broking firms would therefore fall within this definition |
|
|
Work Choices Case
|
The legislation, supported by s51(xxxv) but relying on s51(xx), was challenged on the basis of:
>Dealing with the internal relations of corporations with their workers, rather than their relations with external entities. >The existence of s51(xxxv) precluding using s51(xx) for industrial relations purposes. The High Court ruled that the legislation was constitutional based on a broad reading of s51(xx). The law regulates constitutional corporations and is therefore within the power. |
|
|
New South Wales v Commonwealth (Incorporation Case)
|
The phrase 'formed within the Commonwealth' refers to to corporations already formed under state laws.
|
|
|
Commonwealth v Bank of New South Wales (Banking Case)
|
The High Court ruled that the Parliament may regulate the activities of corporations, but not ban them or remove their legal status.
|
|
|
Re Dingjan
|
The High Court ruled that a law will only fall within the corporations power if the subject matter of the law relates to the 'distinctive character' of trading and financial corporations.
|
|
|
Actors and Announcers Equity v Fontana Films
|
The High Court ruled that a law falls within the corporations power depending on whether the object of statutory command is a constitutional corporation.
|
