Bolton v Madsen [1963] HCA 16

Bolton v Madsen [1963] HCA 16

The permit fee under s. 44, and the double fee under s. 52, are not duties of excise because they are imposed as conditions for using vehicles for carriage, independent of the goods themselves; the validation act validly operates.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Final Judgment
Outcome
appeals dismissed with costs
Legal Topics
['duties of Excise' 'permit Fees' 'state Transport Act' 'validation of Statutes']
['constitutional Law' 'transport Law'] ['duties of Excise' 'permit Fees' 'state Transport Act' 'validation of Statutes']

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 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the permit fee imposed under s. 44 of The State Transport Act of 1960 (Qld) constitutes a duty of excise under s. 90 of the Constitution' 'Whether The Transport Laws Validation Act of 1962 (Qld) validly operates to validate the Act' 'Whether the fee determined under s. 52 (double fee) is a duty of excise']

Ratio Decidendi

The permit fee under s. 44, and the double fee under s. 52, are not duties of excise because they are imposed as conditions for using vehicles for carriage, independent of the goods themselves; the validation act validly operates.

Court Disposition

appeals dismissed with costs

Orders

  • ['Appeals dismissed with costs']