Bessell v Dayman [1935] HCA 5

Bessell v Dayman [1935] HCA 5

By the majority, the High Court held that the South Australian Acts were not materially distinguishable from those previously upheld as valid; the legislation did not contravene s.92 of the Constitution. The appeal was accordingly dismissed, upholding the validity of the licensing regime as applied to inter-State carriers.

Parties
Appellant/defendant: Robert George Bessell; Respondent/plaintiff: Irvine Dayman
Jurisdiction
Australia
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal From a Court of Summary Jurisdiction (south Australia) to the High Court of Australia
Outcome
appeal dismissed with costs
Legal Topics
Inter State Trade, S.92 of the Constitution, Licensing of Public Motor Vehicles, Validity of State Acts
Constitutional Law Transport Law Inter State Trade S.92 of the Constitution Licensing of Public Motor Vehicles Validity of State Acts

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 3 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Robert George Bessell

Appellant/defendant

Irvine Dayman

Respondent/plaintiff

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal From a Court of Summary Jurisdiction (south Australia) to the High Court of Australia

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Road and Railway Transport Acts 1930-1931 (S.A.) infringe s.92 of the Constitution by interfering with the freedom of inter-State trade

Ratio Decidendi

By the majority, the High Court held that the South Australian Acts were not materially distinguishable from those previously upheld as valid; the legislation did not contravene s.92 of the Constitution. The appeal was accordingly dismissed, upholding the validity of the licensing regime as applied to inter-State carriers.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed with costs

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs.