LAW314 Lecture 8 - LAW314 2010 LECTURE 8(18.03.10 Associate...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–4. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
LAW314 2010 LECTURE 8 (18.03.10) Associate Professor Iain Stewart Constitutional Interpretation (contd) ‘Characterisation’—a dialectical determination of validity Cheers for Engineers Amalgamated Society of Engineers v Adelaide Steamship Co Ltd (Engineers Case) (1920) HCA o ‘natural meaning of the text’ o ‘settled rules of [statutory] construction
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
The Dixon Line: Australian National Airways v Commonwealth (1945) HCA: constitutional implications ok [not in it is a Constitution we are interpreting, an instrument of government meant to endure and conferring powers expressed in general propositions wide enough to be capable of flexible application to changing circumstances. […] We should avoid pedantic and narrow constructions in dealing with an instrument of government and I do not see why we should be fearful about making implications.
Background image of page 2
Dixon’s swearing-in as CJ (1952): Jolly good—and impossible. Because a constitution
Background image of page 3

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Image of page 4
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

{[ snackBarMessage ]}

Page1 / 4

LAW314 Lecture 8 - LAW314 2010 LECTURE 8(18.03.10 Associate...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 4. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online