ABSTRACT

An important issue in any federal system is whether one level of government can subject the other to its laws. Must the Commonwealth comply with State planning laws when a Commonwealth government building is constructed; and, conversely, would the States be liable to pay a tax imposed on their income by the Commonwealth? The answers to these questions are important, because they depend on the extent to which either level of government may use its constitutional powers to control the other, and this obviously has implications for the federal balance. There are a few specific instances in which the Constitution deals with the issue explicitly: • s 114 prohibits either level of government from taxing the property

of the other; • s 52 confers exclusive power on the Commonwealth in respect of

Commonwealth places and the Commonwealth public service;

You should be familiar with the following areas:

• whether statutes bind the Crown • the circumstances in which Commonwealth laws bind State

governments • the implied federal principle established in the Melbourne

Corporation case • the circumstances in which State laws bind the

Commonwealth • the implications of s 64 of the Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth) for the

subjection of the Commonwealth to State laws • the way in which ss 114, 52 and 51(xiii) and (xiv) limit the

capacity of the States to bind the Commonwealth

• s 51(xiii) and (xiv) exclude the Commonwealth Parliament from the area of State banking and insurance respectively;

• the States’ power to bind the Commonwealth is able to be displaced by an inconsistent Commonwealth law through the operation of s 109.