Fox v Robbins [1909] HCA 81

Fox v Robbins [1909] HCA 81

The impugned sections of the Wines, Beer and Spirit Sale Act 1880 (W.A.) and amendments, so far as they require a higher fee for a licence to sell wine produced in another State than for a licence to sell wine produced in Western Australia, are inconsistent with s. 92 of the Constitution and are invalid to the extent of their discriminatory effect. Therefore, the respondent could not be convicted under those provisions for selling Victorian wine, and the charge was rightly dismissed.

Parties
Complainant, Appellant: Samuel Alfred Fox; Defendant, Respondent: William Magill Robbins
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
23 March 1909
Procedural Posture
Appeal From Court of Petty Sessions (case Stated) / High Court of Australia (on Question Reserved by Supreme Court)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
Inter State Freedom of Trade, Validity of State Legislation, Discrimination in Licensing Fees, Intoxicating Liquor Regulation
Constitutional Law Inter State Freedom of Trade Validity of State Legislation Discrimination in Licensing Fees Intoxicating Liquor Regulation

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 18 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Samuel Alfred Fox

Complainant, Appellant

William Magill Robbins

Defendant, Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal From Court of Petty Sessions (case Stated) / High Court of Australia (on Question Reserved by Supreme Court)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Western Australian licensing provisions imposing higher fees for sale of wine produced in other States than for wine produced in Western Australia contravened s. 92 of the Constitution
  2. 2 Whether s. 113 of the Constitution modifies or overrides the requirement of freedom of interstate trade for intoxicating liquors
  3. 3 To what extent the relevant State legislation is invalid or inoperative due to such discrimination

Ratio Decidendi

The impugned sections of the Wines, Beer and Spirit Sale Act 1880 (W.A.) and amendments, so far as they require a higher fee for a licence to sell wine produced in another State than for a licence to sell wine produced in Western Australia, are inconsistent with s. 92 of the Constitution and are invalid to the extent of their discriminatory effect. Therefore, the respondent could not be convicted under those provisions for selling Victorian wine, and the charge was rightly dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs.