Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
New South Wales v Commonwealth (also called the WorkChoices case) [1] is a landmark decision of the High Court of Australia, which held that the federal government's WorkChoices legislation [2] was a valid exercise of federal legislative power under the Constitution of Australia.
New South Wales v The Commonwealth, the Incorporation Case, [1] was a decision handed down in the High Court of Australia on 8 February 1990 concerning the corporations power in s51(xx) of the Commonwealth Constitution.
Airlines of New South Wales Pty Ltd v New South Wales (No 2), [1] 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 ...
ACT Law Reports: ACTLR: 2008-Thomson Reuters: Authorised report. Australian Capital Territory Reports: ACTR: 1973-Lexis Nexis: Neutral citation: ACTSC: 1986-AustLII. BarNet JADE. Supreme Court (NSW) NSW Law Reports: NSWLR: 1970-New South Wales Law Reports: Authorised report. Includes NSW Court of Appeal and NSW Court of Criminal Appeal NSW ...
The NSWLR began in 1970, following the establishment of the Council of Law Reporting by the Council of Law Reporting Act 1969. They replaced the State Reports, New South Wales (which began in 1901) as the authorised reports in New South Wales. [4] The current Editor of the NSWLR is Perry Herzfeld SC who has held the position since 2022.
New South Wales v Commonwealth may refer to a number of High Court of Australia cases: New South Wales v Commonwealth (1908) 7 CLR 179; New South Wales v Commonwealth (1915) 20 CLR 54, Wheat Case; New South Wales v Commonwealth (1932) 46 CLR 155, Garnishee Case No 1; New South Wales v Commonwealth (1975) 135 CLR 337, Seas and Submerged Lands Case
New South Wales v Commonwealth, [1] commonly known as the Wheat case, [2] or more recently as the Inter-State Commission case, [3] is a landmark Australian judgment of the High Court made in 1915 regarding judicial separation of power.
Whether a duty of care is owed for psychiatric, as opposed to physical, harm was discussed in the Australian case of Tame v State of New South Wales; Annetts v Australian Stations Pty Ltd (2002). [11] [12] Determining a duty for mental harm has now been subsumed into the Civil Liability Act 2002 in New South Wales. [13]