Section 51(v) of the Constitution of Australia

Last updated

Section 51(v) of the Constitution of Australia (commonly referred as the post and telegraph power) is a subsection of Section 51 of the Constitution of Australia [1] that gives the Australian Parliament power to legislate on "postal, telegraphic, telephonic, and other like services".

Contents

Postal services

In 1901, one of the first Acts of the federal parliament was the Post and Telegraph Act 1901, relying on Section 51(v). [2] The Act created the Postmaster-General's Department (PMG) which took over the colonial mail systems. The PMG was responsible for telegraph and domestic telephone operations as well as postal mail.

In 1975 the Postmaster-General's Department was separated into the Australian Telecommunications Commission (now Telstra) which was responsible for telephone services, [3] and the Australian Postal Commission (now Australia Post) which was responsible for postal services. [4]

The power also supports the issue of Australian postal stamps.

Telephonic services

The power has supported Australia’s regulatory environment for telecommunications in Australia, such as the telecommunications part of the Trade Practices Act. (See Communications in Australia.)

“Other like services”

The most problematic part of this power has been the words “other like services”. The High Court has taken a flexible approach to interpreting this provision that has recognised that technology has changed since the constitution was written.

In the case of R v Brislan , [5] in 1935, the High Court decided that s.51(v) included the power to regulate radio broadcasting. However, in Brislan four of the judges held radio to be a wireless type of ‘telegraphic or telephonic service’, rather than an ‘other like service’.

In the 1965 case of Jones v Commonwealth (No 2) , [6] the High Court found that television broadcasting also fell under the ambit of s.51(v). Although the communications power is often presumed to apply broadly as new technologies arise, it is uncertain, in the absence of litigation, whether Commonwealth regulation will be supported. For example, it is unclear whether regulation of internet content would be supported under s.51(v).

The Commonwealth has already relied on s.51(v) to regulate parts of the internet. For example, the Interactive Gambling Act (Cth), which regulates the operation of online casinos within Australia and advertising of online gambling, was based on s.51(v). [7] Other forms of gambling are a state and territory responsibility.

In March 2013 Australia's accession to the Council of Europe's Convention on Cybercrime came into force following the Cybercrime Legislation Amendment Act 2012 (Cth). [8] The amendments to the Criminal Code which removed the earlier "carriage service" (telephone and internet) elements of some computer offences (in part 10.7) were apparently supported by the s.51(xxix) external affairs power (arising from obligations under an international treaty). This may mean that ratification of the Convention extended the Commonwealth power in this area beyond the s.51(v) power, avoiding the need to rely on the definition of 'other like services'.

Related Research Articles

Australia Act 1986 Legislation by the UK and Australian Parliaments

The Australia Act 1986 is the short title of each of a pair of separate but related pieces of legislation: one an Act of the Commonwealth Parliament of Australia, the other an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom. In Australia they are referred to, respectively, as the Australia Act 1986 (Cth) and the Australia Act 1986 (UK). These nearly identical Acts were passed by the two parliaments, because of uncertainty as to whether the Commonwealth Parliament alone had the ultimate authority to do so. They were enacted using legislative powers conferred by enabling Acts passed by the Parliaments of every Australian state. The Acts came into effect simultaneously.

Section 51 of the Constitution of Australia enumerates the legislative powers granted to Federal Parliament. When the six Australian colonies joined together in Federation in 1901, they became the original States and ceded some of their powers to the new Commonwealth Parliament. There are 39 subsections to section 51, each of which describes a "head of power" under which the Parliament has the power to make laws.

Australian constitutional law

Australian 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.

The legal system of Australia consists of multiple forms of law. The country's legal system comprises of a written constitution, unwritten constitutional conventions, statutes, regulations, and the judicially determined common law.

Section 51(i) of the Australian Constitution enables the Parliament of Australia to make laws about:

Section 51(xxvi) of the Constitution of Australia legal case

Section 51(xxvi) of the Constitution of Australia, commonly called "the race power", is the subsection of Section 51 of the Constitution of Australia granting the Australian Commonwealth the power to make special laws for people of any race.

Section 51(xxix) of the Australian Constitution is a subsection of Section 51 of the Australian Constitution that gives the Commonwealth Parliament of Australia the right to legislate with respect to "external affairs".

Section 51(xxxi) of the Constitution of Australia is a subsection of Section 51 of the Constitution of Australia, providing that the Commonwealth has the power to make laws with respect to "the acquisition of property on just terms from any State or person for any purpose in respect of which the Parliament has power to make laws." It is both a power and a constitutional guarantee of just compensation for property rights contingent on its exercise.

In Australian constitutional law, Chapter III Courts are courts of law which are a part of the Australian federal judiciary and thus are able to discharge Commonwealth judicial power. They are so named because the prescribed features of these courts are contained in Chapter III of the Australian Constitution.

<i>Airlines of New South Wales Pty Ltd v New South Wales (No 2)</i>

Airlines of New South Wales Pty Ltd v New South Wales , was a High Court of Australia case about the validity of Commonwealth regulations about intrastate air navigation. Although the Commonwealth has the power to regulate interstate air navigation under s 51(i) of the Constitution, it can only regulate intrastate air navigation under the implied incidental power attached to that head of power. It was held that intrastate air navigation can be regulated to the extent that it provides for the safety of, or prevention of physical interference with, interstate or foreign air navigation.

<i>Strickland v Rocla Concrete Pipes Ltd</i>

Strickland v Rocla Concrete Pipes Ltd, also known as the Concrete Pipes Case, is a High Court of Australia case that discusses the scope of the corporations power in section 51(xx) of the Australian Constitution. This was an important case in Australian constitutional law because it overruled the decision in the earlier case of Huddart, Parker & Co Pty Ltd v Moorehead, which held that the corporations power only extended as far as the regulation of their conduct in relation to their transactions with or affecting the public. Since this case, the Commonwealth has had at least the ability to regulate the trading activities of trading corporations, thus opening the way for an expansion in Commonwealth power.

Commonwealth v Bank of New South Wales, was a Privy Council decision that affirmed the High Court of Australia's decision in Bank of New South Wales v Commonwealth, promoting the theory of "individual rights" to ensure freedom of interstate trade and commerce. The case dealt primarily with Section 92 of the Constitution of Australia.

<i>Fairfax v Commissioner of Taxation</i>

Fairfax v Commissioner of Taxation is a High Court of Australia case that considered the scope of the taxation power in section 51(ii) of the Constitution.

Common rule awards are a particular form of industrial award used in Australia to regulate minimum terms and conditions of employment. Awards are the end product of the processes of conciliation and arbitration where an industrial tribunal makes an award in settlement of an industrial dispute. Whereas awards are legally binding on all parties to the dispute which are named in the award, with common rule awards all employers in the industry or occupation covered by the award are bound by it.

Court of Disputed Returns (Australia) Special electoral jurisdiction of the High Court of Australia

The Court of Disputed Returns in Australia is a special jurisdiction of the High Court of Australia. This jurisdiction was initially established by Part XVI of the Commonwealth Electoral Act 1902 and is now contained in Part XXII of the Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918. The High Court sitting as the Court of Disputed Returns hears challenges regarding the validity of federal elections. The jurisdiction is twofold: (1) on a petition to the Court by an individual with a relevant interest or by the Australian Electoral Commission, or (2) on a reference by either house of the Commonwealth Parliament.

Australian corporate law

Australian corporations law has historically borrowed heavily from UK company law. Its legal structure now consists of a single, national statute, the Corporations Act 2001. The statute is administered by a single national regulatory authority, the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC).

<i>Bond v Commonwealth</i> legal case heard in the High Court of Australia in 1903

Bond v Commonwealth was an early decision of the High Court of Australia that established that rights under the Constitution could not be taken away by Commonwealth legislation. The case was the second case heard by the High Court.

Section 51(xxvii) of the Constitution of Australia grants the Commonwealth Parliament the power to make laws with respect to "immigration and emigration." Historically, it was the principal legislative power in support of Australia's immigration scheme, which is now embodied in the Migration Act 1958 (Cth).

<i>Australian Boot Trade Employees Federation v Whybrow & Co</i>

Australian Boot Trade Employees Federation v Whybrow & Co, commonly known as Whybrow's case or the Boot Trades case was the third of a series of decisions of the High Court of Australia in 1910 concerning the boot manufacturing industry and the role of the Commonwealth Court of Conciliation and Arbitration in preventing and settling industrial disputes. In doing so the High Court considered the constitutional power of the Federal Parliament to provide for common rule awards and the jurisdiction of the High Court to grant prohibition against the Arbitration Court. The majority held in Whybrow that the Arbitration Court could not make an award that was inconsistent with a State law, but that different minimum wages were not inconsistent as it was possible to obey both laws. In Whybrow the High Court established the doctrine of ambit, with the emphasis on the precise claim made and refused, and the practice with respect to "paper disputes" being treated "prima facie as genuine and real", with the majority holding that the High Court had power to order prohibition to correct jurisdictional error as part of its original jurisdiction. Finally in Whybrow the High Court unanimously held that the Federal Parliament had no constitutional power to provide for common rule awards.

References

  1. ↑ Constitution (Cth) s 51 Legislative powers of the Parliament.
  2. ↑ Post and Telegraph Act 1901 (Cth).
  3. ↑ Telecommunications Act 1975 (Cth).
  4. ↑ Postal Services Act 1975 (Cth).
  5. ↑ R v Brislan [1935] HCA 78 , (1935) 54 CLR 262 (17 December 1935), High Court (Australia).
  6. ↑ Jones v Commonwealth (No 2) [1965] HCA 6 , (1965) 112 CLR 206(3 February 1965), High Court (Australia).
  7. ↑ Interactive Gambling Act 2001 (Cth).
  8. ↑ Cybercrime Legislation Amendment Act 2012 (Cth).

Geraldine Chin Technological Change and the Australian Constitution [2000] MULR 25

This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.