100%(1)1 out of 1 people found this document helpful
This preview shows page 18 - 20 out of 102 pages.
Authority’s argumentHC: points to Authority’s established functions and activitiesPurpose test and activities test?Online video part 2:What aspects or activities of a corporation can be regulated? Tells a story of expanding commonwealth power A question of interpretation:What is the scope of s 51(xx) corporations power- What does it permit the commonwealth to regulate?Once understood, we can go to the next question of characterizationThen, characterisationGiven this scope – having answered this question – is this a law with respect to the corporations power?What categories of persons other than corporations can be regulated due to their relation to constitutional corporations?Section 51(xx)-The Parliament shall, subject to this Constitution, have power to make laws for the peace, order, and good government of the Commonwealth with respect to: …-Foreign corporations, and trading or financial corporations formed within the limits of the CommonwealthHuddart, Parker & Co Pty Ltd v Moorehead (1909) 8 CLR 330 interstate power Ways of looking at the case sunder section 52 (20):-The power enables the commonwealth to address the special kinds of regulatory issues that governments pose -Enables commonwealth to pass laws to regulate the trading and financial activities of corporations-Enables commonwealth to pass laws to regulate the activities, actions and related parties of certain types of corporations
Power enables the Cth to recognize and provide for corporations to operate beyond their jurisdiction of origin (interstate power) – e.g. protecting creditors offering lines of credit to corporations operating interstateThis case- character of the corporation and its trading, financial trading, being a foreign entity as limiting categories Corporations power was facilitating the corporation of interstate activities Focused on (a) corporations; and (b) trading, financial, foreign as limiting category Reserved state powers:Griffith CJ – that the Commonwealth could not control the operation of a corporation which ‘lawfully enters upon a field of operation, the control of which is exclusively reserved to the States’ (354)We cannot regulate activities that would infringe upon matters exclusively from the state Overturned: Strickland v Rocla Concrete Pipes Ltd(1971) 124 CLR 468, 484 (Barwick CJ) ‘Corporation’ – identifying foreign trading of financial corporations as the object of power:Isaacs J, dissenting (393):Corporations was a separate and independent power, additional to the commerce power (s 51(i));Empowering law that depends on simply the specific objects of the power – a foreign, trading, or financial corporation – whether in a single State or inter-State – once on this subject, can regulate anymatterNot then including domestic corporations for municipal, mining, manufacturing, religious, scholastic, orcharitable purposes.