Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-b95js Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-30T22:52:01.351Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Clark King & Co. Pty Ltd v. Australian Wheat Board

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 January 2025

B. Pearson
B. Pearson*
Affiliation:
Supreme Court of the Australian Capital Territory
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Case Note
Information
Federal Law Review , Volume 10 , Issue 2 , June 1979 , pp. 188 - 196
Copyright
Copyright © 1979 The Australian National University

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

1

Clark King & Co. Pty Ltd v. Australian Wheat Board and the State of New South Wales; KMM Pty Ltd v. Australian Wheat Board; Victorian Oatgrowers Pool and Marketing Co. Ltd v. Australian Wheat Board; Bunge (Australia) Pty Ltd v. Australian Wheat Board (1978) 21 A.L.R. 1; (1978) 52 A.L.J.R. 670. High Court of Australia; Barwick C.J., Stephen, Mason, Jacobs and Murphy JJ.

References

1 Clark King & Co. Pty Ltd v. Australian Wheat Board and the State of New South Wales; KMM Pty Ltd v. Australian Wheat Board; Victorian Oatgrowers Pool and Marketing Co. Ltd v. Australian Wheat Board; Bunge (Australia) Pty Ltd v. Australian Wheat Board (1978) 21 A.LR. 1; (1978) 52 A.L.J.R. 670. High Court of Australia; Barwick C.J., Stephen, Mason, Jacobs and Murphy JJ.

2 (1978) 21 A.L.R. 1, 3 per Barwick C.J.

3 The Wheat Industry Stabilization Act 1974 (N.S.W.) in the case of wheat owned by Clark King & Co. Pty Ltd, KMM Pty Ltd and Bunge (Australia) Pty Ltd and the Wheat Industry Stabilization Act 1974 (Vic.) in the case of the Victorian Oatgrowers Pool & Marketing Co. Ltd.

4 (1978) 21 A.L.R. 1, 3-8.

5 Id. 42-45.

6 S. 10 of the N.S.W. Act; s. 21 of the Commonwealth Act.

7 S. 11 of the N.S.W. Act; s. 22 of the Commonwealth Act.

8 S. 12 of the N.S.W. Act; s. 23 of the Commonwealth Act.

9 S. 13 of the N.S.W. Act; s. 24 of the Commonwealth Act.

10 Mason, Jacobs and Murphy JJ., Barwick C.J. and Stephen J. dissenting.

11 Murphy J. allowed the defendants' demurrers without considering the arguments put by both parties.

12 (1978) 21 A.L.R. 1, 12-13.

13 Id. 33.

14 Id. 12.

15 Id. 13.

16 Id. 14.

17 (1920) 28 C.L.R. 530.

18 (1975) 134 C.L.R. 559; (1975) 7 A.LR. 433.

19 (1978) 21 A.L.R. 1, 31.

20 Id. 32.

21 Jbid.

22 Id. 49.

23 (1953) 88 C.L.R. 353.

24 (1978) 21 A.L.R. 1, 50.

25 Id. 49.

26 (1915) 20 C.L.R. 54.

27 (1978) 21 A.L.R. 1, 18.

28 Id. 42.

29 Id. 50. The importance of the element of discrimination has since been particularly stressed by Jacobs J. in his judgment in Bartter's Farms Pty Ltd v. Todd (1978) 52 A.L.J.R. 697, 705 where he stressed that the element of discrimination is important in deciding whether a law affecting trade, commerce and intercourse between the States is merely regulatory.

30 (1949) 79 C.L.R. 497.

31 Id. 639-641.

32 (1978) 21 A.L.R. 1, 21.

33 See, in particular Samuels v. Reader's Digest Association Pty Ltd (1969) 120 C.L.R. 1, 14-15.

34 (1978) 21 A.L.R.1, 22.

35 Id. 24.

36 Id. 25.

37 Id. 28.

38 In particular, Stephen J. referred to Hughes and Vale Pty Ltd v. New South Wales (No. 2) (1955) 93 C.L.R. 127;The Transport Cases; Australian National Airways Pty Ltd v. Commonwealth (1945) 71 C.L.R. 29; Wilcox Mofflin Ltd v. N.S.W. (1952) 85 C.L.R. 488 Williams v. Metropolitan and Export Abattoirs Board (1953) 89 C.L.R. 66 and North Eastern Dairy Case (1975) 134 C.L.R. 559.

40 Id. 38.

41 Ibid.

42 Id. 39-40.

43 Id. 50.

44 Id. S1-53.

45 Id. 53.

46 Id. 54.

47 Id. 53.

48 Field Peas Marketing Board (Tas.) v. Clements & Marshall Pty Ltd (1948) 76 C.L.R. 401; also (1948) 76 C.L.R. 414.

49 (1978) 21 A.LR. 1, 26.

50 Id. 27.

51 See Rose, “Federal Principles for the Interpretation of Section 92 of the Constitution” (1972) 46 A.L.J. 371, 375-376.

52 (1978) 21 A.L.R. 1, 29.

53 Id. 41.

54 Id. 52-53.

55 James v. Cowan (1929) 43 C.L.R. 386; The Peanut Board v. Rockhampton Harbour Board (1932-1933) 48 C.L.R. 266; Clements & Marshall Pty Ltd v. Field Peas Marketing Board (Tas.) (1947) 76 C.L.R. 401.

56 (1978) 28 A.L.R. 1, 33.

57 Id. 54.

58 (1976) 135 C.L.R. 110.

59 (1978) 21 A.L.R. 1, 55.

60 An action commenced against the Australian Wheat Board by Mr Uebergang and others has not, to date, been heard.