SECTION 92 AND THE REGULATION OF E-COMMERCE: A CASENOTE ON BETFAIR PTY LTD V WESTERN AUSTRALIA
|
|
- Bertina Berry
- 8 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 SECTION 92 AND THE REGULATION OF E-COMMERCE: A CASENOTE ON BETFAIR PTY LTD V WESTERN AUSTRALIA Eli Ball* INTRODUCTION The internet is a new and ubiquitous tool for conducting business. In the age of e- commerce, distance and physical borders mean very little. The Constitution, however, was drafted at a time when trade and commerce was characterised by important geographical considerations, the most significant being the geo-political boundaries between the several colonies that became the States. The internet has all but destroyed whatever remnants of that age might have survived the previous 100 years. This tension between recent technological advancement and long established constitutional jurisprudence confronted the High Court in Betfair Pty Ltd v Western Australia. 1 Betfair is one of a long line of cases dealing with the freedom of interstate trade and commerce enshrined in s 92 of the Constitution, the most litigated section of Australia's highest document of government. But it is also truly unique: Betfair is the first time that the freedom of interstate trade and commerce has been considered in an e-commerce context. Presented with this opportunity, the High Court has elaborated upon the approach to s 92 set down nearly 20 years ago in Cole v Whitfield. 2 The outcome has significant consequences for both State and Commonwealth internet regulators. Betfair strongly suggests that e-commerce in Australia will be difficult to control at a State level in the future. States are precluded from regulating (or prohibiting) internet based activities if similar activities (whether they be physically or electronically based) are provided with a competitive advantage. Regulation will survive constitutional scrutiny if that competitive advantage is an unavoidable effect of an otherwise legitimate objective that is reasonably proportionate. 3 But even this threshold, Betfair suggests, will become increasingly difficult to satisfy during the internet age. * B Com (Accg), LLB (Hons 1) (Macq). The author would like to thank Robynne Croft and Sebastian Hartford-Davis for their input in preparing this piece for publication. All errors are, of course, the author's alone. 1 Betfair Pty Ltd v Western Australia (2008) 244 ALR 32 ('Betfair'). 2 (1998) 165 CLR See generally Castlemaine Tooheys Ltd v South Australia (1990) 169 CLR 436.
2 266 Federal Law Review Volume 36 THE FACTS Betfair Pty Ltd ('Betfair') is the Australian arm of a well-known online betting agency that was originally based in London. The service Betfair provides is unlike anything previously available to punters in Australia from the traditional TAB or racetrack bookmaker. The key difference is that Betfair operates an online 'betting exchange'. Punters do not place bets with Betfair. Instead, Betfair acts as an online intermediary through which punters can place bets with other punters. Another distinct feature of Betfair's operation is the ability of punters to bet against a team, horse or other competitor. This feature in particular has attracted heavy criticism from both racing and government bodies. It has been argued that the ability to 'bet on the loser' provides all too great a temptation for those with the ability to influence the outcome of a sporting event (such as trainers, jockeys or those associating with them). 4 This, it has been said, represents an unacceptable threat to the continued health and integrity of Australian sport. 5 There is a further threat posed by Betfair to the status quo of Australian sport. This threat comes in the form of competition to traditional wagering operators such as the TAB and local racetrack bookmakers. A report in 2003 to the Australasian Racing Ministers' Conference received special attention from the High Court on this very point. Among other things, the report concluded that 'betting exchanges on Australian racing would pose a serious threat to current betting turnover levels of the three categories of licensed wagering operator in Australia TABs, traditional bookmakers and corporate bookmakers.' 6 Despite these concerns Betfair was able to operate Australia-wide, taking bets from all States on sporting events in all States, until 29 January The company was (and continues to be) licensed in Tasmania to operate a betting exchange under the Gaming Control Act 1993 (Tas). Such a licence is subject to several conditions and restrictions. These include a prohibition on wagering on illegal activities, the requirement that betting exchanges maintain the capacity to freeze player funds where inappropriate activity is suspected, and the prohibition of wagering on any event which the Tasmanian Gaming Commission considers inappropriate. After 29 January 2007, however, Betfair was no longer able to operate in Western Australia, nor with respect to Western Australian sporting events. The Racing Legislation Amendment Act 2006 (WA) made it an offence to establish or operate a betting exchange. 7 It also created the offence of betting through a betting exchange. 8 This latter prohibition, when read in conjunction with ss 12 and 13 of the Criminal Code Act Compilation Act 1913 (WA), had the effect of making Betfair liable for aiding, counselling or procuring the offence. This was so even if Betfair itself never acted in Western Australia. 4 See, eg, Western Australia, Parliamentary Debates, Legislative Assembly, 13 September 2006, (Mark McGowan MLA); Katherine Jimenez, 'Tabcorp seeks betting exchange ban', The Australian (Sydney), 29 November 2007, See, eg, Andrew Darby and Orietta Guerrera, 'Betfair gets foot in door in Australia', The Age (Melbourne), 4 November 2005, 2. 6 Report of the Betting Exchange Taskforce Australasian Racing Ministers' Conference Volume 1 (July 2003) 2. 7 Betting Control Act 1954 (WA) s 27B(1). 8 Betting Control Act 1954 (WA) s 24(1aa).
3 2008 Section 92 and the Regulation of E-Commerce 267 These were not the only limitations placed upon Betfair's activities. An essential part of its operations depended on the provision to punters of information about the events they wished to bet on. For horseracing this essential information was contained in the 'race field'. Section 27D(1) of the amended legislation however made it an offence for a person (be they a bookmaker, totalisator or betting exchange operator) to publish or otherwise make available a Western Australian race field in the course of business. This prohibition applied unless the person was granted ministerial approval. 9 Further, because the Minister had to have regard to the policy behind the legislation in granting an approval, and because that policy included the prohibition on betting exchanges, it was virtually impossible for Betfair to gain such approval. Indeed, Betfair was denied approval for this very reason. 10 Betfair was thus left in the awkward position of being unable not only to access the racing industry in Western Australia, but also to take bets on sporting events around Australia from anyone who happened to be in Western Australia at the time of making the bet. Because Betfair, like many businesses today, operated through the internet and telephonic means which transcend physical boundaries, the prospect of a cyber limitation in the peculiar shape of Western Australia was an unsettling and troublesome one. It is against this background that Betfair (with the intervening support of Tasmania) challenged the validity of the Western Australian legislation. Western Australia's defence was joined by the Commonwealth and the States of New South Wales, South Australia, Victoria and Queensland. Betfair's challenge was based on two alternative grounds. First, it argued that both ss 24(1aa) and 27D(1) were invalid in their application to Betfair by virtue of s 92 of the Constitution. 11 Secondly, and with respect to s 27D(1) only, Betfair argued that it was invalid by reason of s 118 of the Constitution and an implied constitutional restraint on the extraterritorial reach of State legislative power. 12 The High Court unanimously accepted Betfair's submissions with respect to s 92, and for this reason it was unnecessary to consider the alternative arguments. 13 The impugned Western Australian law was held to impose a discriminatory burden of a protectionist kind that was neither proportionate nor appropriate and adapted to a legitimate object and purpose. For this reason it violated s 92 of the Constitution and was invalid. 14 The decision came in two separate judgments. The main judgment was delivered by Gleeson CJ, Gummow, Kirby, Hayne, Crennan and Kiefel JJ. Justice Heydon gave a short, separate concurring judgment. In reaching the conclusion that it did, the High Court reiterated the approach to s 92 that has emerged since Cole v Whitfield. However, with what will no doubt attract a collective sigh from students and enthusiasts of constitutional law alike, the Court added the rider that Cole v Whitfield should not be viewed as 'a complete break with all that had been said in this Court respecting the 9 Betting Control Act 1954 (WA) s 27D(1)(a)-(b). 10 Western Australia Minister for Racing and Gaming Ljiljanna Ravlich, 'Betfair application to publish WA race fields not in the public interest' (Press Release, 11 October 2007). 11 Betfair (2008) 244 ALR 32, 55 (Gleeson CJ, Gummow, Kirby, Hayne, Crennan and Kiefel JJ). 12 Ibid. 13 Ibid 56 (Gleeson CJ, Gummow, Kirby, Hayne, Crennan and Kiefel JJ), 65, 68 (Heydon J). 14 Ibid (Gleeson CJ, Gummow, Kirby, Hayne, Crennan and Kiefel JJ).
4 268 Federal Law Review Volume 36 place of s 92 in the scheme of the Constitution' prior to The Court noted that Chapter IV of the Constitution implemented a broad scheme of 'political economy' and that Cole v Whitfield directed the focus of deciding a case based on s 92 to achieving that scheme as it was understood at the time the Constitution was framed. 16 The challenge for the Court, however, was how to apply this late nineteenth century concept of political economy to a case involving early twenty-first century modes of e-commerce and the internet. THE PRESENT APPROACH TO SECTION 92 Section 92 has been described by the High Court as the greatest source of judicial concern and effort emanating from within the Constitution. 17 It appears under Chapter IV 'Finance and Trade' and states, in relevant part that '[o]n the imposition of uniform duties of customs, trade, commerce, and intercourse among the States, whether by means of internal carriage or ocean navigation, shall be absolutely free.' The section is grammatically awkward on its face. One may even go so far as to describe it as clumsy or ugly. The beginning phrase 'on the imposition of uniform duties of customs' is a reference to s 88 of the Constitution, which states that '[u]niform duties of customs shall be imposed within two years after the establishment of the Commonwealth.' Section 92 mandates that once the uniform duties of customs described in s 88 are imposed (a prerequisite long ago satisfied) then trade, commerce and intercourse among the States (whether by land or by sea) shall be absolutely free. Understanding the grammatical nuances of s 92 is, however, regrettably only the first and relatively easy step in appreciating its meaning and scope. For the better part of nearly 90 years controversy abounded as the High Court and Privy Council grappled with the task of interpreting exactly what was meant by the phrase 'trade, commerce, and intercourse among the States... shall be absolutely free.' A plethora of meanings have been cast upon s 92 since 1901, ranging from a free trade view of the section in the early days of the Federation to a laissez-faire endorsement by the mid to late twentieth century. 18 As Professors Tony Blackshield and George Williams describe, this ideological tension was matched by a division between some of Australia's greatest jurists. 19 Fortunately, much of what was said about s 92 prior to 1988 was reduced to little more than nostalgia, following the unanimous decision of the Mason Court in Cole v Whitfield. In an effort to resolve once and for all the issue of interstate trade and commercial freedom, the Court famously began by holding that it could consider the history of s 92's insertion into the Constitution, including that contained in the Convention Debates: 15 Betfair (2008) 244 ALR 32, 37 (Gleeson CJ, Gummow, Kirby, Hayne, Crennan and Kiefel JJ). 16 Ibid 39. (Gleeson CJ, Gummow, Kirby, Hayne, Crennan and KeifelKiefel JJ). 17 Cole v Whitfield (1988) 165 CLR 360, (The Court). 18 See, eg, Fox v Robbins (1909) 8 CLR 115. Cf Commonwealth v Bank of New South Wales (1949) 79 CLR Tony Blackshield and George Williams, Australian Constitutional Law and Theory (3 rd ed, 2002) Professors Blackshield and Williams suggest that a convenient way to appreciate the caselaw prior to Cole v Whitfield is by reference to 'three dominant individuals': Sir Isaac Isaacs, Sir Owen Dixon and Sir Garfield Barwick.
5 2008 Section 92 and the Regulation of E-Commerce 269 Reference to the history of s.92 may be made, not for the purpose of substituting for the meaning of the words used the scope and effect if such could be established which the founding fathers subjectively intended the section to have, but for the purpose of identifying the contemporary meaning of language used, the subject to which that language was directed and the nature and objectives of the movement towards Federation from which the compact of the Constitution finally emerged. 20 After an extensive review of this history, the Court stated that '[s]ection 92 precluded the imposition of protectionist burdens: not only interstate border customs duties but also burdens, whether fiscal or non-fiscal, which discriminated against interstate trade and commerce.' 21 It explained that this test would invalidate a law whose formal or substantial effect was to subject interstate trade and commerce to disability or disadvantage. 22 As to this concept of 'protectionism', the Court explained that the object or purpose of the impugned law would be relevant: In the case of a State law, the resolution of the case must start with a consideration of the nature of the law impugned. If it applies to all trade and commerce, interstate and intrastate alike, it is less likely to be protectionist than if there is discrimination appearing on the face of the law. But where the law in effect, if not in form, discriminates in favour of intrastate trade, it will nevertheless offend against s.92 if the discrimination is of a protectionist character. A law which has as its real object the prescription of a standard for a product or a service or a norm of commercial conduct will not ordinarily be grounded in protectionism and will not be prohibited by s.92. But if a law, which may be otherwise justified by reference to an object which is not protectionist, discriminates against interstate trade or commerce in pursuit of that object in a way or to an extent which warrants characterization of the law as protectionist, a court will be justified in concluding that it nonetheless offends s This new approach swept away what had previously been one of the central theses of s 92 characterisation, namely that the freedom of interstate trade and commerce to which it referred amounted to a conferral of 'individual rights'. 24 Instead, the High Court shifted attention to the historical purposes and goals of federation, and economic unity among the States. Ultimately, what matters since Cole v Whitfield is whether the law in question has the effect of protecting intrastate trade and commerce by giving it a 'competitive or market advantage' over interstate trade and commerce. 25 If the answer to this question is 'yes' then the law is invalid by reason of s 92 unless, as the Court explained in the later case of Castlemaine Tooheys, that advantage can be justified as the unintended consequence of regulation which is 'necessary or appropriate and adapted' to a legitimate purpose unrelated to interstate trade and commerce Cole v Whitfield (1988) 165 CLR 360, 385 (The Court). 21 Ibid Ibid Ibid See, eg, Commonwealth v Bank of New South Wales (1949) 79 CLR 497, 635 (Lord Porter); McCarter v Brodie (1950) 80 CLR 432, 465 (Dixon J); North Eastern Dairy Co Ltd v Dairy Industry Authority of NSW (1975) 134 CLR 559, 582 (Barwick CJ). 25 Cole v Whitfield (1988) 165 CLR 360, 409 (The Court). 26 Castlemaine Tooheys (1990) 169 CLR 436, 472 (Mason CJ, Brennan, Deane, Dawson and Toohey JJ).
6 270 Federal Law Review Volume 36 THE APPROACH TAKEN IN BETFAIR All of the parties in Betfair, including the interveners, accepted that the source of present doctrine respecting s 92 was Cole v Whitfield and the handful of High Court authorities subsequent to it. 27 Given that acceptance, the joint judgment developed that doctrine further by elaborating upon what was said previously in Cole v Whitfield and Castlemaine Tooheys. The significance of national unity Cole v Whitfield established that the history of s 92 prior to federation in 1901 could be relevant for 'the purpose of identifying the contemporary meaning of language used' in the section. 28 That language is 'trade, commerce, and intercourse among the States, whether by means of internal carriage or ocean navigation, shall be absolutely free.' The search for meaning undertaken by the joint judgment in Betfair was not strictly limited to these words. Following what was said in Ha v New South Wales, 29 the Court referred to the 'plan of the Constitution for the creation of a new federal nation' and the implementation of a political economy. 30 Neither of these concepts exists in the strict text, or for that matter in the structure of the Constitution. 31 Their significance derives from their place in the history of s 92 as instructed by Cole v Whitfield. The task undertaken by the joint judgment in Betfair was to explain the meaning of these concepts as they feature within that history. The joint judgment relied upon two key historical sources for this purpose. First, it considered the work of economic and political historians focusing on the mid to late nineteenth century and the fiscal policies of the British colonies. Secondly, it drew assistance from United States caselaw decided during this period on the basis that this jurisprudence had been a source of assistance in drafting, framing and inserting s 92 into the Constitution. The result of this analysis is a view of s 92 aligned with Cole v Whitfield and subsequent cases, promoting national unity in the regulation of trade and commerce among the States. That this is so is evident from the words of Cardozo J who, though speaking of the United States' Constitution, was cited with a degree of approval in the joint reasons: The Constitution was framed under the dominion of a political philosophy less parochial in range. It was framed upon the theory that the peoples of the several States must sink or swim together, and that in the long run prosperity and salvation are in union and not division. 32 Also cited with special emphasis in the joint reasons was another US decision, this time by Harlan J in Guy v Baltimore: [I]t must be regarded as settled that no State can, consistently with the Federal Constitution, impose upon the products of other States, brought therein for sale or use, or upon citizens because engaged in the sale therein, or the transportation thereto, of the 27 Betfair (2008) 244 ALR 32, 37 (Gleeson CJ, Gummow, Kirby, Hayne, Crennan and Kiefel JJ). 28 Cole v Whitfield (1988) 165 CLR 360, 385 (The Court). 29 (1997) 198 CLR Betfair (2008) 244 ALR 32, 38, 41 (Gleeson CJ, Gummow, Kirby, Hayne, Crennan and Kiefel JJ) (emphasis added). 31 See generally McGinty v Western Australia (1996) 186 CLR Baldwin v G A F Seelig, Inc, 294 US 511, 523 (1935) (emphasis added). Cited in Betfair (2008) 244 ALR 32, 44 (Gleeson CJ, Gummow, Kirby, Hayne, Crennan and Kiefel JJ).
7 2008 Section 92 and the Regulation of E-Commerce 271 products of other States, more onerous public burdens or taxes than it imposes upon the like products of its own territory. 33 Earlier in its reasons, the joint judgment had indicated that the emergence of a 'National Competition Policy' was a significant development to consider as part of the legal and economic background to s 92's application. This, together with Harlan J's reference to 'like products', called for a consideration of whether Betfair's outlawed betting exchange activities were in fact in competition with the traditional forms of gambling that were uninhibited by the Western Australian legislation. The Court held that they were and that the impugned law had the effect of restricting competition within that national market. 34 Because Betfair and the traditional gambling operators existed within the same market, outlawing of Betfair's activities within that State and denying it access to the vital race fields was characterised as an attempt to shield those traditional service providers from interstate competition. 35 The situation appears to have been aptly described by Kirby J during the hearing of the case in 2007 as an attempt 'to sort of hive off the little fortress, Western Australia'. 36 Employing the language of supply and demand, the joint judgment accepted Betfair's arguments that: [The] legislation of Western Australia impermissibly precludes, with respect to internet transactions having a geographical connection with that State, that increase in competition, on the supply side, within the national market for betting services which would be provided, on the demand side, by the presence within Western Australia at any one time of such persons as Mr Erceg... [The] legislation also applies to deny to the outof-state operator in the position of Betfair access for the purposes of its Australia-wide operations to information respecting race fields which is generated by racing operators in Western Australia, whilst in-state wagering operators do not suffer that disadvantage. 37 A further point should be made concerning the significance of national unity following the decision in Betfair. This relates to whether s 92 can render invalid a State law which nevertheless applies equally to interstate and intrastate trade and commerce. The answer to this question has been 'yes' since the Privy Council's decision in James v Commonwealth, 38 and continues to be so following Betfair. 39 However, with Betfair the High Court appears to have avoided an analysis based upon a simple dichotomy. What matters in each case is whether the effect upon the identified national market for goods and services is the diminution of interstate competition. 40 The fact that a law applies equally to interstate and intrastate trade and commerce will be 33 Guy v Baltimore, 100 US 434, 439 (1879). Cited in Betfair (2008) 244 ALR 32, 46 (Gleeson CJ, Gummow, Kirby, Hayne, Crennan and Kiefel JJ). 34 Betfair (2008) 244 ALR 32, 62 (Gleeson CJ, Gummow, Kirby, Hayne, Crennan and Kiefel JJ), 64 (Heydon J). 35 Ibid 62, 63 (Gleeson CJ, Gummow, Kirby, Hayne, Crennan and Kiefel JJ), 64, 67 (Heydon J). 36 Transcript of Proceedings, Betfair Pty Ltd & Anor v State of Western Australia (High Court of Australia, Kirby J, 9 November 2007). 37 Betfair (2008) 244 ALR 32, 37 (Gleeson CJ, Gummow, Kirby, Hayne, Crennan and Kiefel JJ). 38 (1936) 55 CLR 1, 56 (Lord Wright MR). 39 Betfair (2008) 244 ALR 32, 41 (Gleeson CJ, Gummow, Kirby, Hayne, Crennan and Kiefel JJ). The joint judgment also cited at 48 the opinion of Harlan J to the same effect in Minnesota v Barber 136 US 313 (1890). 40 Betfair (2008) 244 ALR 32, 37 (Gleeson CJ, Gummow, Kirby, Hayne, Crennan and Kiefel JJ).
8 272 Federal Law Review Volume 36 irrelevant if the range of activities prohibited by the State law is narrower than the Court-identified national market for s 92 purposes. 41 State governments must therefore 'cast the net' of prohibition as wide as the national market for goods and services in order to ensure that s 92 is not infringed. In this case, although Western Australia prohibited betting exchanges irrespective of their State of origin, the High Court's characterisation of the national market as including both betting exchanges and traditional modes of gambling meant that the prohibition on betting exchanges alone could not survive s 92. For the State legislation to have survived it would have had to prohibit all forms of gambling because that was the relevant national market. The test of proportionality In Castlemaine Tooheys the High Court set out the circumstances in which a law that had the practical effect of imposing a 'discriminatory burden of the protectionist kind' might nevertheless avoid the invalidating effect of s 92. The test set out three limbs to be satisfied: firstly, the law must have a legitimate non-protectionist purpose; secondly, the legislation must be necessary or 'appropriate and adapted' to achieving that purpose; and thirdly, the protectionist effect of the law must be merely incidental and proportional to that purpose. The joint judgment in Betfair noted that despite the presentation of arguments by the plaintiff and Tasmania doubting the satisfaction of the first limb of the test, the case could be resolved through application of the second. 42 To this end, it stated that the correct doctrine to apply was one based on proportionality and the concept of 'reasonable necessity'. 43 The joint judgment accepted the view of Mason J in North Eastern Dairy Co Ltd v Dairy Industry of NSW to the effect that a discriminatory law must be necessary for the advancement of a legitimate purpose if it is to be considered a reasonable, and therefore permissible, regulation of interstate trade and commerce. 44 The joint judgment framed the issue in Betfair as whether the alleged purposes of the impugned sections of the Betting Control Act provided an 'acceptable explanation or justification' for the differential treatment of Western Australian and interstate gambling services. The Court focused on the two justifications advanced by Western Australia for the prohibition of betting exchanges and the denial of access to the race fields. First, it was argued that betting exchanges made no contribution to the racing industry in Australia an industry vital, it alleged, for employment and enjoyment across the State. The joint judges quickly dismissed this as an unacceptable justification for the discriminatory effect of the legislation. In doing so they drew support from the fact 41 To use the words of Heydon J, the trading activity prohibited and the trading activity protected need not be identical if they can be described as part of the same overall trading activity, that is, part of the same national market: ibid Ibid 61 (Gleeson CJ, Gummow, Kirby, Hayne, Crennan and Kiefel JJ). 43 Ibid 59 (Gleeson CJ, Gummow, Kirby, Hayne, Crennan and Kiefel JJ). Citing Thomas v Mowbray (2007) 81 ALJR 1414, (Gleeson CJ). 44 (1975) 134 CLR 559, 608. Cited in Betfair (2008) 244 ALR 32, 59 (Gleeson CJ, Gummow, Kirby, Hayne, Crennan and Kiefel JJ). This is further evidence of the proposition advanced by the Court that Cole v Whitfield did not completely sever the continuity of s 92 jurisprudence.
9 2008 Section 92 and the Regulation of E-Commerce 273 that Betfair had undertaken, with other States' regulators, to return a certain amount of money to the industry as part of its ongoing operations. This method of referring to other States' legislative responses to Betfair also featured prominently in the rejection of the second justification advanced by Western Australia, namely that the amendments to the Betting Control Act were necessary to safeguard the integrity of the racing industry. The joint judgment expressed doubt as to the existence of such a threat, but reasoned that even if it did exist, the regulatory regime in Tasmania had demonstrated what was one possible 'appropriate and adapted' response to it: What is involved here is an attempt at an evidentiary level to measure something of an imponderable. But, allowing for the presence to some degree of a threat of this nature, a method of countering it, which is an alternative to that offered by prohibition of betting exchanges, must be effective but non-discriminatory regulation. That was the legislative choice taken by Tasmania and it cannot be said that that taken by Western Australia is necessary for the protection of the integrity of the racing industry of that State. In other words, the prohibitory State law is not proportionate; it is not appropriate and adapted to the propounded legislative object. 45 Justice Heydon, on the other hand, in his separate concurring judgment resolved the case by reference to the first limb of the test set out in Castlemaine Tooheys. That is, he rejected Western Australia's contention that the prohibition of betting exchanges and denial of access to the race field had a legitimate non-protectionist purpose. Referring to the prohibition on betting exchanges, he agreed with the joint judgment that the prohibition was not proportionate. However, this he reasoned was evidence of the fact that preserving the integrity of the racing industry was not the purpose sought to be advanced by the legislation. 46 SECTION 92, THE INTERNET AND LEGISLATIVE RESPONSES TO E- COMMERCE Betfair is the first time that internet technology has featured as an issue within constitutional litigation. It would be a mistake, however, to assume that constitutional jurisprudence was unprepared for this inevitability. The necessity of a flexible and timeless approach to the interpretation of the Constitution has long been appreciated by those charged with carrying out that task. This made them readily capable of absorbing the internet and new technologies within the established framework of constitutional assessment. In the early days of the High Court, it was O'Connor J who famously said: '[I]t must always be remembered that we are interpreting a Constitution broad and general in its terms, intended to apply to the varying conditions which the development of our community must involve.' 47 Betfair was not the first time that new forms of trade and commerce had been the subject of s 92 considerations and it almost certainly will not be the last, 48 a fact which 45 Betfair (2008) 244 ALR 32, 61 (Gleeson CJ, Gummow, Kirby, Hayne, Crennan and Kiefel JJ). 46 Ibid 64 (Heydon J). 47 Jumbunna Coal Mine, No Liability v Victorian Coal Miners' Association (1908) 6 CLR 309, (O'Connor J). See also, in the context of s 92, Samuels v Readers' Digest Association Pty Ltd (1969) 120 CLR 1, 14 (Barwick CJ); North Eastern Dairy Co Ltd v Dairy Industry Authority of NSW (1975) 134 CLR 559, 615 (Mason J). 48 See, eg, Australian National Airways Pty Ltd v Commonwealth (1945) 71 CLR 29, (Dixon J); Commonwealth v Bank of New South Wales (1949) 79 CLR 497, 632 (Lord Porter).
10 274 Federal Law Review Volume 36 does not appear to have been lost on the High Court. Presented with this opportunity, the High Court set about the task of adapting s 92 to what US Court of Appeals Judge and noted economist Richard Posner has described as the 'new economy' where trade and commerce are characterised by internet-based businesses and borderless communication services. 49 Even the recent analyses of s 92 expounded in Cole v Whitfield and Castlemaine Tooheys, the joint judgment explained, could not avoid certain practical and conceptual difficulties in this new context. On the vice of protecting intrastate trade from interstate competition in the age of the internet, the joint judgment noted that: Cole v Whitfield established that, at least in its application to trade and commerce among the States, the object of s 92 is the elimination of protection. The term 'protection' is concerned with the preclusion of competition, an activity which occurs in a market for goods or services. To focus upon the geographic dimension given by State boundaries, when considering competition in a market in internet commerce, presents practical and conceptual difficulties. 50 Later, as it considered Western Australia's claim of proportionality, the joint judgment hinted that the internet might yield an inevitable contraction in the range of discriminatory regulation otherwise permissible under s 92. Referring to what was described in Castlemaine Tooheys as the 'fundamental consideration' of a State to enact laws for the wellbeing of its people; 51 it noted that 'a condition of localised well-being will not encompass much modern State regulatory legislation in the new economy.' 52 With regard to proportionality, the joint judgment seems to suggest that as the reach of trade and commerce transcends geographical boundaries with the aid of the internet, so too does the reach and practical effect of State regulation, thus making it harder for State laws to keep under the threshold of proportionality. Taking the facts of Betfair as an example, the internet enabled operators like Betfair located outside Western Australia to access customers located inside Western Australia in the national market for gambling services. The corollary of this access was that that State's prohibition on betting exchanges was felt across State borders and therefore on interstate traders like Betfair. The geographical reach of State regulation is doubtless one important factor to consider in assessing whether it is reasonably proportionate: the more wide-ranging the impact of an impugned law, the less likely it is to be found necessary for the protection of a legitimate State-related interest. The effect of the internet therefore is twofold: first, State-centred regulation is broad in effect, and therefore; secondly, the proportionality of that regulation seems less likely. One also needs to consider the effect of the internet on market definition for s 92 purposes. Market definition was arguably always an inherent part of any approach to s 92 based upon protectionism and competition. This is because the very concept of competition has, at its heart, the existence of a market in which competition may occur. In Betfair, market analysis assumed a new prominence in the Court's reasoning process. As stated above, what matters in a s 92 case is whether the effect of State 49 See generally Richard A Posner, Antitrust in the New Economy (2001) 68 Antitrust Law Journal Betfair (2008) 244 ALR 32, 38 (Gleeson CJ, Gummow, Kirby, Hayne, Crennan and Kiefel JJ). 51 Castlemaine Tooheys (1990) 169 CLR 436, 472 (Mason CJ, Brennan, Deane, Dawson and Toohey JJ). 52 Betfair (2008) 244 ALR 32, 57 (Gleeson CJ, Gummow, Kirby, Hayne, Crennan and Kiefel JJ).
11 2008 Section 92 and the Regulation of E-Commerce 275 legislation on an identifiable national market for goods and services is the diminution of interstate competition. As Betfair makes clear, how one defines and measures the ambit of the particular market is critical. The market must be defined before the existence of interstate competition within it can be determined. Only then can one go about the further task of assessing whether the impugned law has the effect of lessening such interstate competition. Justice Dawson explained, albeit in the context of the Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth), that the test for defining the market and its scope involves a consideration of what is known as 'the cross elasticities of both supply and demand, that is to say, the extent to which the supply of or demand for a product responds to a change in the price of another product.' 53 In a later case, McHugh J noted that factors relevant to the assessment of cross elasticity and, therefore, the definition and scope of a market included inter alia 'the physical and technical characteristics of the product', 'the views and past behaviours of consumers regarding the potential for substitution between products' and '[t]he cost to consumers... of switching from one product to another.' 54 The suitability of this analysis to s 92 cases was acknowledged by the joint judgment in Betfair. 55 The potential influence of the internet on the factors featured within that analysis, and therefore the overall market definition, should be obvious. In many cases the availability of goods and services online, where costs are cheaper and the agony of distance less, will mean a greater substitutability of products and increased cross elasticity of demand. The inevitable result is a larger market both in terms of products available and the spread of geographical area. This larger market means State legislators face a greater threat from s 92 that their regulation of trade and commerce will be struck down as disadvantaging interstate competition. The type of product at issue in Betfair provides a good example. Prior to the advent of mass means of instantaneous communication services, such as the internet, it is more than likely that there existed separate discrete markets for gambling on horseraces in and across the several Australian States. It would have been difficult (though not necessarily impossible) for a punter in Tasmania to place a bet on a horserace in Western Australia. There would have been low cross elasticity of demand and supply. If Western Australia had sought to outlaw betting exchanges during such a time then it seems more than likely that the legislation would not have been held invalid under s 92. This is because a Tasmanian and Western Australian betting exchange would not have existed in the same market. There would have been no effect on interstate competition because there would have been no interstate competition in the first place. However, Betfair was decided in the age of the mass digital communication, where a punter in Tasmania could easily place a bet on a Western Australian horserace. The ease of navigating the internet means there is little difference to that punter between placing a bet through a betting exchange like Betfair or through a traditional gambling service provider like the TAB. The market is larger in size and in scope, so when 53 Queensland Wire Industries Pty Ltd v Broken Hill Proprietary Co Ltd (1989) 167 CLR 177, 199 (Dawson J). See also Boral Besser Masonry Ltd v Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (2003) 215 CLR 374, (McHugh J). 54 Boral Besser Masonry Ltd v Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (2003) 215 CLR 374, 456 (McHugh J). 55 Betfair (2008) 244 ALR 32, 36 (Gleeson CJ, Gummow, Kirby, Hayne, Crennan and Kiefel JJ).
12 276 Federal Law Review Volume 36 Western Australia decides to outlaw betting exchanges the effect of that move is to disadvantage the interstate trader, Betfair. Section 92 will not allow this. Above all, despite the omnipresence of the internet and its influence upon important factors such as market definition, the High Court has maintained the approach to s 92 set out in Cole v Whitfield. This is evident from the penultimate paragraph of s 92 discussion in the joint reasons. Despite the significant role of technology on the facts of the case, Western Australia's actions could be described in technologically neutral language: The effect of the legislation of Western Australia is to restrict what otherwise is the operation of competition in the stated national market by means dependent upon the geographical reach of its legislative power within and beyond the State borders. This engages s 92 of the Constitution. 56 CONCLUSION The internet is an effective means of conducting business, trade and commerce over vast distances, across physical boundaries and with minimal cost. The barriers to entry for e-commerce markets are significantly lower than their traditional real-world counterparts. The result is that in this 'new economy' markets are larger in both physical size and product make-up. In the context of the several Australian States, as elsewhere, the growth of e-commerce presents a threat to traditional localised market participants including those who have had the benefit of near monopolistic local market conditions. As that threat heightens, State governments may be inclined to pass legislation in an attempt to safeguard the prevailing economic conditions of what they may have traditionally considered to be local State markets. So it was in the case of Betfair. But the underlying assumption behind such a move, namely that its effect is localised within the confines of a small local market, is wrong. The internet has brought growth to local markets and with it, interstate competition. That engages s 92 of the Constitution. State legislatures may therefore be powerless in many cases to prevent the inevitability of e-commerce. Beyond predicting what the High Court will consider a legitimate object and purpose met with an 'appropriate and adapted response', the most obvious means of avoiding s 92 when regulating e-commerce seems, at first thought, to be the adoption of uniform legislation. Under a uniform scheme, the potential for irregularities and advantages in competition between intrastate and interstate market participants would be significantly reduced: traders in one State would be subject to the same burden as traders from other States operating across the border. However, following Betfair, there would appear to be two problems with such an approach: one constitutional and one practical. First, as to the constitutionality of such a scheme, a uniform approach to internet regulation alone ignores the fact that in many cases the relevant market will consist, as it did in Betfair, of both traditional participants and their internet-based counterparts. Denying suppliers from one State access to demanders in another through the internet is just as impermissible as denying them access to physical roads into that other State. Regulation must be uniform not only across the internet but also 56 Ibid 62 (Gleeson CJ, Gummow, Kirby, Hayne, Crennan and Kiefel JJ).
13 2008 Section 92 and the Regulation of E-Commerce 277 as between internet and non-internet commerce. These concerns apply whether the source of regulation is State or Commonwealth legislators. 57 Second, the practicality of maintaining a uniform legislative regime seems unlikely. A scheme based on State cooperation seems highly volatile. All that might be necessary for the scheme to collapse would be the refusal by one State to adhere to what it perceived to be unduly harsh restrictions. E-commerce providers would then flock to base themselves within that State and subsequently challenge the validity of those other States' more oppressive regulatory regimes. As Betfair illustrates, the least restrictive form of regulation is most likely to survive. It is often said that the practical success of attempts to regulate the internet depends upon the willingness of legislators to work together in achieving uniformity across physical boundaries. 58 That this is true in the case of e-commerce cannot be doubted. Betfair demonstrates, however, that it is not merely a matter of developing convenience, ease and expediency. It is also, at least in the Australian context, a constitutional imperative. The regulation of trade and commerce, whether physical or electronic, must not give the market participants of one State a competitive advantage over the market participants of another. In the 'new economy', however, the potential for such imbalance may prove to be too great. 57 See generally Cole v Whitfield (1988) 165 CLR 360, , (The Court). 58 See, eg, Joel R Reidenberg, 'Resolving Conflicting International Data Privacy Rules in Cyberspace' (2000) 52 Stanford Law Review 1315; Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, Dismantling the Barriers to Global Electronic Commerce, OECD Doc DSTI/ICCP(98) (1998).
Australian sport and the Commonwealth constitution
Bond University epublications@bond Sports Law ejournal Faculty of Law 12-7-2012 Australian sport and the Commonwealth constitution Chris Davies James Cook University Follow this and additional works at:
More informationANNUAL GENERAL MEETING 2012
ANNUAL GENERAL MEETING 2012 ANNUAL GENERAL MEETING 2012 Alan Jackson Chairman New Zealand Racing Board Financial highlights 2011 2012 Betting turnover $1.533b $1.622b Net betting revenue $228m $238m Operating
More informationSUBMISSION TO AUSTRALIAN TAXATION REVIEW COMMITTEE. Better Tax - Wagering Reform Proposal. Nationals Senator, Bridget McKenzie
SUBMISSION TO AUSTRALIAN TAXATION REVIEW COMMITTEE Better Tax - Wagering Reform Proposal Nationals Senator, Bridget McKenzie 1. GENERAL SUBMISSION The Better Tax Discussion Paper invites submissions on
More informationDefective works: No duty of care decision
Defective works: No duty of care decision Daniel Russell and Scott Chambers This article was first published in the Law Society Journal August 2012 Vol 50 No. 7 Melbourne 1 Sydney Brisbane Contents In
More informationThe Regulatory Framework Gene Technology Act 2000 (Cth) and the Gene Technology Bill 2001 (WA)
For Who s Benefit? - Evaluating Genetically Modified Organisms in Western Australia from a Different Perspective Conference held by Conservation Council WA 10 October 2002 The Regulatory Framework Gene
More informationDECISION AND REASONS FOR DECISION
JONES AND JUSTICE OFFICE OF THE INFORMATION COMMISSIONER (W.A.) File Ref: 97023 Decision Ref: D01897 Participants: Edith Winifred Jones Complainant - and - Ministry of Justice Respondent DECISION AND REASONS
More informationDRAFT DATA RETENTION AND INVESTIGATORY POWERS BILL
DRAFT DATA RETENTION AND INVESTIGATORY POWERS BILL INTRODUCTION EXPLANATORY NOTES 1. These explanatory notes relate to the Draft Data Retention and Investigatory Powers Bill. They have been prepared by
More informationUK - legal overview by John Hagan and Melanie Ellis
The Gambling Act 2005 ( the 2005 Act ), which came into force on 1 September 2007, regulates all forms of gambling in the UK with the exception of the National Lottery and spread betting. This legislation
More informationA CONSTITUTIONAL PERSPECTIVE ON HUGHES 1 AND THE REFERRAL OF POWERS. Dennis Rose and Geoffrey Lindell
A CONSTITUTIONAL PERSPECTIVE ON HUGHES 1 AND THE REFERRAL OF POWERS by Dennis Rose and Geoffrey Lindell Paper Presented at the Corporate Law Teachers Association Conference The Future of Corporate Regulation:
More informationHuman rights, property and the Recovery of Medical Costs for Asbestos Diseases (Wales) Bill in the Supreme Court
Human rights, property and the Recovery of Medical Costs for Asbestos Diseases (Wales) Bill in the Supreme Court Frankie McCarthy* The Recovery of Medical Costs for Asbestos Diseases (Wales) Bill was referred
More informationSupreme Court Judgment in Coventry and Ors v Lawrence and another [2015] UKSC 50
Alerter 24 th July 2015 Supreme Court Judgment in Coventry and Ors v Lawrence and another [2015] UKSC 50 The Supreme Court has handed down its Judgment in Coventry v Lawrence in which it considered the
More informationApproximately 76 per cent of the bets taken by Sportsbet are on racing, with the remaining 24 per cent being on sporting or other events.
Introduction Sportsbet Pty Ltd (hereafter, Sportsbet, we and our ) welcomes the opportunity to make a submission to the Victorian Competition and Efficiency Commission (VCEC) as part of the Commission
More informationWORKCOVER QUEENSLAND AMENDMENT BILL 2002
1 WORKCOVER QUEENSLAND AMENDMENT BILL 2002 EXPLANATORY NOTES GENERAL OUTLINE Objectives of the legislation To provide for miscellaneous amendments to the WorkCover Queensland Act 1996. Reason for the Bill
More informationGoogle Inc v Australian Competition and Consumer Commission [2013] HCA 1: Misleading and Deceptive Representations
153 Google Inc v Australian Competition and Consumer Commission [2013] HCA 1: Misleading and Deceptive Representations GRAHAM HANSEN* Digital technologies have created new problems for the law. In recent
More informationAustralian Government Solicitor the leading lawyers to government
Number 13 29 November 2005 Litigation notes Advertisement of personal injury legal services A majority of the High Court held that it is constitutionally permissible for state legislation to prohibit lawyers
More informationMessage 791 Communication from the Commission - SG(2012) D/50777 Directive 98/34/EC Notification: 2011/0188/D
Message 791 Communication from the Commission - SG(2012) D/50777 Directive 98/34/EC Notification: 2011/0188/D Reaction of the Commission to the response of a Member State notifying a draft regarding a
More informationThis is the author s version of a work that was submitted/accepted for publication in the following source:
This is the author s version of a work that was submitted/accepted for publication in the following source: Stickley, Amanda P. (2012) Long term exposure to asbestos satisfies test for causation. Queensland
More information2015docs\INSLM02. 1 See Intelligence Services Act 1994, s 5(1): No entry on or interference with property or with wireless telegraphy
Professor Clive Walker School of Law, University of Leeds Inquiry into section 35P of the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation Act 1979 Submission to the Independent Security Law Monitor 3 April
More informationISSUES PAPER LEGAL REPRESENTATION AND JURISDICTIONAL LIMIT IN SMALL CLAIMS
DEPARTMENT OF THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL AND JUSTICE ISSUES PAPER LEGAL REPRESENTATION AND JURISDICTIONAL LIMIT IN SMALL CLAIMS June 2013 Legal Policy Division Department of the Attorney-General and Justice
More informationThis is the author s version of a work that was submitted/accepted for publication in the following source:
This is the author s version of a work that was submitted/accepted for publication in the following source: Stickley, Amanda P. (2011) The defence of joint illegal activity must be looked at in context.
More informationI will then turn my attention to the strategies we have adopted to meet the challenges, and broadly the reasons why.
Ladies and Gentlemen Firstly, let me congratulate the organizers of today s meeting for their initiative and foresight in bringing together such a large cross-section of racing industry participants to
More informationAustralian Product Liability Trends: Class Actions & Litigation Funding
Australian Product Liability Trends: Class Actions & Litigation Funding By Annette Hughes, Partner, and Christie Jones, Lawyer Corrs Chambers Westgarth A lively class action market The Australian Federal
More informationSTATUTORY AMENDMENT TO THE WORKERS' COMPENSATION ACT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA.
STATUTORY AMENDMENT TO THE WORKERS' COMPENSATION ACT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA. Section 7 (1) of the Workers' Compensation Act of Western Australia has statutory equivalents in all Australian States, and is
More informationChanges coming to the U.K. online gaming market
COVER STORY Changes coming to the U.K. online gaming market Top legal experts in the U.K. preview tax and regulatory changes to Europe s most important market Changes coming to the U.K. online gaming market
More informationSupplementary Information Disability Discrimination and Other Human Rights Legislation Amendment Bill
Supplementary Information Disability Discrimination and Other Human Rights Legislation Amendment Bill Senate Legal and Constitutional Affairs Committee 9 February 2009 GPO Box 1989, Canberra ACT 2601,
More informationQueensland WHISTLEBLOWERS PROTECTION ACT 1994
Queensland WHISTLEBLOWERS PROTECTION ACT 1994 Act No. 68 of 1994 Queensland WHISTLEBLOWERS PROTECTION ACT 1994 Section PART 1 PRELIMINARY TABLE OF PROVISIONS Division 1 Title and commencement Page 1 Short
More informationPROTECTING HUMAN RIGHTS IN THE UK THE CONSERVATIVES PROPOSALS FOR CHANGING BRITAIN S HUMAN RIGHTS LAWS
PROTECTING HUMAN RIGHTS IN THE UK THE CONSERVATIVES PROPOSALS FOR CHANGING BRITAIN S HUMAN RIGHTS LAWS HUMAN RIGHTS IN CONTEXT Britain has a long history of protecting human rights at home and standing
More informationNATIONAL WORKERS COMPENSATION AND OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH AND SAFETY FRAMEWORKS
NATIONAL WORKERS COMPENSATION AND OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH AND SAFETY FRAMEWORKS SUBMISSION TO THE PRODUCTIVITY COMMISSION FROM THE BUSINESS COUNCIL OF AUSTRALIA 1 INTRODUCTION SUBMISSION The BCA makes the
More informationSubmission to the Australian Government Attorney-General s Department, the Honourable Robert McClelland MP
Submission to the Australian Government Attorney-General s Department, the Honourable Robert McClelland MP Reform of Commonwealth legal service purchasing proposals 6 June 2008 Public Interest Law Clearing
More informationContract Disputes How to prevent them; How to deal with them
Contract Disputes How to prevent them; How to deal with them Presentation by Geoff Browne, Victorian Small Business Commissioner to the Victorian Waste Management Association 27 May 2014 Thank you for
More informationWESTERN AUSTRALIAN FEDERATION OF SEXUAL ASSAULT SERVICES (WAFSAS) FORUM 4 October 2005, Perth
WESTERN AUSTRALIAN FEDERATION OF SEXUAL ASSAULT SERVICES (WAFSAS) FORUM 4 October 2005, Perth Criminal Injuries Compensation By Helen Porter, Office of Criminal Injuries Compensation. INTRODUCTION In this
More informationOnline Copyright Infringement. Discussion Paper
Online Copyright Infringement Discussion Paper July 2014 Introduction There are a number of factors that contribute to online copyright infringement in Australia. These factors include the availability
More informationSubmission by AFA Pty Ltd on the development of new Terms of Reference for the Financial Ombudsman Service
Submission by AFA Pty Ltd on the development of new Terms of Reference for the Financial Ombudsman Service Preamble AFA Pty Ltd does not operate as an insurer in its own right, but offers its products
More informationSUPPLEMENT No. 2 TO THE SOVEREIGN BASE AREAS GAZETTE No. 1681 of 25th February 2013 LEGISLATION
SUPPLEMENT No. 2 TO THE SOVEREIGN BASE AREAS GAZETTE No. 1681 of 25th February 2013 LEGISLATION CONTENTS: The following LEGISLATION is published in this Supplement which forms part of this Gazette : Ordinance
More informationProportionate Liability Northern Territory
1. Proportionate liability national approach On 27 February 2004, the national Ministerial forum on Insurance Issues comprising representatives from the Commonwealth, the States, the Northern Territory
More informationReview of Sports Betting Regulation 31 March 2011
Review of Sports Betting Regulation 31 March 2011 CONTENTS 2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 3 REPORT BACKGROUND 5 THE EXISTING REGULATORY REGIME 6 Approval of sporting events 7 Contingencies 7 Approval of sports controlling
More informationCivil Procedures : Some Comparisons
Civil Procedures : Some Comparisons Judicial Conference of Australia Inc., Third Annual Colloquium, The Courts and the Future Gold Coast, Qld, November 1998 Preliminary: For the purpose of comparison with
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW ZEALAND SC 116/09 [2010] NZSC 109 MATTHEW JOHN BIRCHLER NEW ZEALAND POLICE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW ZEALAND SC 116/09 [2010] NZSC 109 MATTHEW JOHN BIRCHLER v NEW ZEALAND POLICE Hearing: 11 August 2010 Court: Counsel: Elias CJ, Blanchard, Tipping, McGrath and William Young
More informationGambling Team 3 rd Floor Department for Culture, Media and Sport 2-4 Cockspur Street London SW1Y 5DH
Gambling Team 3 rd Floor Department for Culture, Media and Sport 2-4 Cockspur Street London SW1Y 5DH Department for Culture, Media and Sport Consultation on the proposed amendments to Schedule 6 of the
More informationRE: 1562860 ONTARIO LTD. c.o.b. as SHOELESS JOE S Plaintiff v. INSURANCE PORTFOLIO INC. and CHRISTOPHER CONIGLIO. Defendants v.
COURT FILE NO.: 4022A/07 (Milton) DATE: 20090401 SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE - ONTARIO RE: 1562860 ONTARIO LTD. c.o.b. as SHOELESS JOE S Plaintiff v. INSURANCE PORTFOLIO INC. and CHRISTOPHER CONIGLIO Defendants
More informationCitation: Sadler, Pauline and Guthrie, Rob. 2001. Sports Injuries and the Right to Compensation. Legal Issues in Business 3: 9-14.
Citation: Sadler, Pauline and Guthrie, Rob. 2001. Sports Injuries and the Right to Compensation. Legal Issues in Business 3: 9-14. Permanent Link: http://espace.library.curtin.edu.au/r?func=dbin-jump-full&local_base=gen01-era02&object_id=18981
More informationKABLE S CASE AND THE RULE OF LAW
KABLE S CASE AND THE RULE OF LAW The Hon Kevin Lindgren AM QC Formerly a judge of the Federal Court of Australia* Introduction The decision of the High Court of Australia in Kable v Director of Public
More informationLandmark Case EQUALITY RIGHTS AND THE CANADIAN PENSION PLAN LAW v. CANADA
Landmark Case EQUALITY RIGHTS AND THE CANADIAN PENSION PLAN LAW v. CANADA Prepared for the Ontario Justice Education Network by Counsel for the Department of Justice Canada. Law v. Canada (Minister of
More informationContemporary community safeguards inquiry
Contemporary community safeguards inquiry AUSTRALIAN HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION SUBMISSION TO THE AUSTRALIAN COMMUNICATIONS AND MEDIA AUTHORITY 15 JULY 2013 By email: ccsinquiry@acma.gov.au ABN 47 996 232
More informationThe provision of Ambulance Services in Australia: a legal argument for the national registration of paramedics
Submission 6 - Attachment 2 Australasian Journal of Paramedicine Volume 8 Issue 4 Article 4 2012 The provision of Ambulance Services in Australia: a legal argument for the national registration of paramedics
More informationSUBMISSION TO PRODUCTIVITY COMMISSION REVIEW OF MUTUAL RECOGNITION SCHEMES JANUARY 2015
QUEENSLAND COLLEGE OF TEACHERS SUBMISSION TO PRODUCTIVITY COMMISSION REVIEW OF MUTUAL RECOGNITION SCHEMES JANUARY 2015 BACKGROUND The Queensland College of Teachers ( the QCT ) was established in January
More informationATTORNEY GENERAL S GUIDELINES ON PLEA DISCUSSIONS IN CASES OF SERIOUS OR COMPLEX FRAUD
ATTORNEY GENERAL S GUIDELINES ON PLEA DISCUSSIONS IN CASES OF SERIOUS OR COMPLEX FRAUD A FOREWORD A1. These Guidelines set out a process by which a prosecutor may discuss an allegation of serious or complex
More informationDEPARTMENT OF HEALTH FIXED RECOVERABLE COSTS PROPOSALS FOR CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE: Implications for patients access to justice and for patient safety
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH FIXED RECOVERABLE COSTS PROPOSALS FOR CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE: Implications for patients access to justice and for patient safety Briefing by Action against Medical Accidents (AvMA) October
More informationNSW COURT OF APPEAL DECISION SUPPORTS LITIGATION FUNDING MARKET
NSW COURT OF APPEAL DECISION SUPPORTS LITIGATION FUNDING MARKET Introduction 1. The New South Wales Court of Appeal, in a unanimous Judgment on Thursday 31 March 2005, sent some clear messages to legal
More informationQUT Intellectual property law and innovation research group
QUT Intellectual property law and innovation research group Submission to Senate Standing Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs on the Copyright Amendment (Online Infringement) Bill 2015. April
More informationWRITING A LEGAL ADVICE
WRITING A LEGAL ADVICE The importance of legal advice-writing During your time at Law School, you will have learned how to answer problem-type questions for exams and assignments. This is an important
More informationEDUCATION ISSUES IN BILL C- 32 Submission to Canadian Parliament Canadian School Boards Association December 2010
EDUCATION ISSUES IN BILL C- 32 Submission to Canadian Parliament Canadian School Boards Association December 2010 2 Table of Contents 1. INTRODUCTION... 3 2. EDUCATION ISSUES IN BILL C- 32... 3 3. EDUCATIONAL
More informationINTERNET USAGE AND THE POTENTIAL EFFECT IN YOUR MANAGEMENT OF YOUR PATENT PROGRAM. Steven D. Hemminger. Lyon & Lyon, LLP
INTERNET USAGE AND THE POTENTIAL EFFECT IN YOUR MANAGEMENT OF YOUR PATENT PROGRAM Steven D. Hemminger Lyon & Lyon, LLP {1} Much has been written and said about the Internet and the benefits for a company
More informationACCC/ASIC 'Debt collection guideline for collectors and creditors' publication review
1 November 2012 Mr Richard Weksler Assistant Director Compliance Strategies Branch Australian Competition & Consumer Commission Level 35 360 Elizabeth Street MELBOURNE VIC 3000 By email: richard.weksler@accc.gov.au
More informationSUPREME COURT OF SOUTH AUSTRALIA (Magistrates Appeals: Criminal)
SUPREME COURT OF SOUTH AUSTRALIA (Magistrates Appeals: Criminal) DISCLAIMER - Every effort has been made to comply with suppression orders or statutory provisions prohibiting publication that may apply
More information1. My remarks this morning, which are directed to the professional. negligence of financial advisers, will extend to the proposed new
SPAA SMSF NATIONAL CONFERENCE, BRISBANE 23-25 February 2011 PROFESSIONAL NEGLIGENCE 23 February 2011 The Hon Sir Anthony Mason AC KBE * Introduction 1. My remarks this morning, which are directed to the
More informationShould you have any questions about our submission, please contact Tony de Govrik on 02 9953 1057. Kind regards
Assistant Secretary Business Law Branch Attorney-General s Department Robert Garran Offices 3 5 National Circuit BARTON ACT 2600 contractlaw@ag.gov.au 20 July 2012 Dear Assistant Secretary, IMPROVING AUSTRALIA
More informationGREEN-WILSON & BISHOP THE RECENT LEAP FORWARD IN COMMERCIAL SURROGACY JURISPRUDENCE IN AUSTRALIA
GREEN-WILSON & BISHOP THE RECENT LEAP FORWARD IN COMMERCIAL SURROGACY JURISPRUDENCE IN AUSTRALIA By Paul Boers Accredited Specialist (Family Law)/ Reproductive Lawyer Level 13, 200 Queen St, Melbourne
More informationTHE LAW REFORM COMMISSION OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA
THE LAW REFORM COMMISSION OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA Project No 45 Mortgage Brokers REPORT SEPTEMBER 1974 The Law Reform Commission of Western Australia was established by the Law Reform Commission Act 1972.
More informationThe Duty of Solicitors to Give Tax Advice - A Rebuttal of the Reply
The Duty of Solicitors to Give Tax Advice - A Rebuttal of the Reply HE Editor has kindly provided me with the opportunity to respond to the T reply written by a correspondent to my article 'The Duty of
More information2 March 2015. Mutual Recognition Schemes Study Productivity Commission Locked Bag 2 Collins Street East MELBOURNE VIC 8003
2 March 2015 Mutual Recognition Schemes Study Productivity Commission Locked Bag 2 Collins Street East MELBOURNE VIC 8003 Sent via email to: mutual.recognition@pc.gov.au Dear Commissioner, Master Electricians
More informationLegislative Council Panel on Home Affairs Information Paper
LC Paper No. CB(2)535/99-00 Legislative Council Panel on Home Affairs Information Paper Proposed Amendments to the Gambling Ordinance (Cap. 148) to outlaw unauthorized gambling with extraterritorial elements
More informationExtending Unfair Contract Term Protections to Small Businesses. SUBMISSION by the OFFICE OF THE AUSTRALIAN SMALL BUSINESS COMMISSIONER
Extending Unfair Contract Term Protections to Small Businesses SUBMISSION by the OFFICE OF THE AUSTRALIAN SMALL BUSINESS COMMISSIONER AUGUST 2014 We are writing to provide some observations on the small
More informationBetting-Law-News Edition 02/05
1. Real Madrid v. Betting Agencies - Part 2... 2 2. Aspirations expected from the Gambling Industry: the Final Decision of the WTO was reached on the 7th of April 2005... 3 3. Just one Mega-Casino!...
More informationIndemnity and Insurance Arrangements for Clinical Trials in the Public and Private Sectors in Australia
Indemnity and Insurance Arrangements for Clinical Trials in the Public and Private Sectors in Australia Report to the National Health and Medical Research Council Prepared by Rallis Legal Index Definition
More informationThis chapter notes, where appropriate, further legislative reforms by the Commonwealth and each State or Territory jurisdiction.
FURTHER REFORMS Since 2002, jurisdictions across Australia have taken account of their individual circumstances and made alterations to their legislative regimes additional to the comprehensive programme
More information12 May 2014. Professor Barbara McDonald Commissioner Australian Law Reform Commission GPO Box 3708 Sydney NSW 2001. By Email to: info@alrc.gov.
12 May 2014 Geoff Bowyer T 03 9607 9497 F 03 9607 5270 president@liv.asn.au Professor Barbara McDonald Commissioner Australian Law Reform Commission GPO Box 3708 Sydney NSW 2001 By Email to: info@alrc.gov.au
More informationOptimal Product Fee Models for Australian Sporting Bodies. July 2012
Optimal Product Fee Models for Australian Sporting Bodies July 2012 Optimal Product Fee Models for Australian Sporting Bodies 2 Contents Definitions and Acronyms 4 Executive Summary 5 1 High Court Decision
More informationLimitation of Liability
Limitation of Liability Submission to the Attorney-General (Western Australia) July 2000 The Institution of Engineers, Australia Institution of Engineers, Australia 11 National Circuit, Barton, ACT, 2604
More informationCCBE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE DATA RETENTION DIRECTIVE
Représentant les avocats d Europe Representing Europe s lawyers CCBE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE DATA RETENTION DIRECTIVE CCBE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE DATA RETENTION
More informationOFFICE OF THE INFORMATION ) S 126 of 1995 COMMISSIONER (QLD) ) (Decision No. 95031)
OFFICE OF THE INFORMATION ) S 126 of 1995 COMMISSIONER (QLD) ) (Decision No. 95031) Participants: JAMES MICHAEL O'DWYER Applicant - and - THE WORKERS' COMPENSATION BOARD OF QUEENSLAND Respondent DECISION
More informationEXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF U.S. APPELLANT SUBMISSION
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF U.S. APPELLANT SUBMISSION 1. Introduction. The ETI Panel Report is analytically flawed and expands the meaning of provisions of the SCM Agreement. In addition, the Panel s analysis
More informationFederation of Law Societies of Canada. Ottawa, November 26, 2013
Submission to the Standing Senate Committee on Banking, Trade and Commerce in Respect of Bill C-4 (a second Act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on March 21, 2013 and
More informationMarket Definition and Analysis for SMP: A practical guide
Market Definition and Analysis for SMP: A practical guide David Rogerson Jim Holmes Incyte Consulting Ltd Incyte Consulting Pty Ltd United Kingdom Australia t/f +44 1324 870429 t/f +61 3 9752 7828 www.incyteconsulting.com
More informationISP liability in Denmark
ISP liability in Denmark Clement Salung Petersen Assistant Professor, PhD Centre for Information and Innovation Law www.ciir.dk Dias 1 A Danish perspective on ISP liability ISP liability Mere conduit,
More information25 September 2015. Workplace Relations Framework Productivity Commission GPO Box 1428 Canberra City ACT 2601. By email: workplace.relations@pc.gov.
25 September 2015 Workplace Relations Framework Productivity Commission GPO Box 1428 Canberra City ACT 2601 By email: workplace.relations@pc.gov.au Dear Commissioner The Justice Connect Self Representation
More information1. Introduction to Negligence
1. Introduction to Negligence You should be familiar with the following areas: l how to prove negligence l legislative reform to the law of negligence INTRODUCTION A tort exists to protect rights. The
More informationResponse to Insurance Contracts Amendment Bill 2013. December 2012. Submission on behalf of Legal Aid NSW. Consumer Action Law Centre,
Response to Insurance Contracts Amendment Bill 2013 December 2012 Submission on behalf of Legal Aid NSW Consumer Action Law Centre, Insurance Law Service & Consumer Representatives to Treasury Introduction
More informationSubmission to the Royal Commission into Trade Union Governance and Corruption
Submission to the Royal Commission into Trade Union Governance and Corruption 22 August 2014 Issues Paper 4: Relevant Entities Introduction The Australian Industry Group (Ai Group) makes this submission
More informationThe General Manager Business Tax Division The Treasury Langton Crescent PARKES ACT 2600. Dear Sir/Madam. Tax Agent Services Bill
The General Manager Business Tax Division The Treasury Langton Crescent PARKES ACT 2600 Financial Planning Association of Australia Limited ABN 62 054 174 453 Level 4, 75 Castlereagh Street Sydney NSW
More informationDeclaration of Internet Rights Preamble
Declaration of Internet Rights Preamble The Internet has played a decisive role in redefining public and private space, structuring relationships between people and between people and institutions. It
More informationGA/2013/0001 Luxury Leisure Ltd The Gambling Commission NJ Warren
FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL GENERAL REGULATORY CHAMBER Gambling Tribunal Reference: Appellant: Respondent: Judge: GA/2013/0001 Luxury Leisure Ltd The Gambling Commission NJ Warren DECISION NOTICE A. Introduction
More informationIN THE TAX COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA HELD IN CAPE TOWN
R E P O R T A B L E IN THE TAX COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA HELD IN CAPE TOWN BEFORE: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B. WAGLAY : PRESIDENT MR. R.T. DE BEER : ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MR. I.J. MOUTON : COMMERCIAL MEMBER
More informationElectronic Commerce and Competition (October 2000)
Office of Economic Competition Electronic Commerce and Competition (October 2000) 1. Introduction The competition policy approach towards electronic commerce - as the market is in continuous change - is
More informationAlternative Dispute Resolution Can it work for Administrative Law?
Alternative Dispute Resolution Can it work for Administrative Law? The Honourable Justice Garde AO RFD, President of VCAT Paper delivered on 26 February 2014 to a seminar hosted by the Australian Institute
More informationHIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA
HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA CRENNAN, KIEFEL, BELL, GAGELER AND KEANE OHN DALY APPELLANT AND ALEXANDER THIERING & ORS RESPONDENTS Daly v Thiering [2013] HCA 45 6 November 2013 S115/2013 ORDER 1. Appeal allowed.
More informationGAMBLING AND PRIVACY. Siobhan Jenner Office of the Privacy Commissioner NSW
GAMBLING AND PRIVACY Siobhan Jenner Office of the Privacy Commissioner NSW Paper presented at the 2 nd National Gambling Regulation Conference, convened by the Australian Institute of Criminology in conjunction
More informationCustodian-Node data provision terms and conditions
Custodian-Node data provision terms and conditions Parties Node Operator Data Custodian Background A B C D E [Insert legal name of node][insert ACN/ABN/ARBN] of [Insert address]\ [Insert legal name of
More informationSWIMMING AUSTRALIA LIMITED GAMBLING, BETTING AND MATCH FIXING POLICY. Swimming Australia Limited - Gambling, Betting and Match Fixing Policy Page 1
SWIMMING AUSTRALIA LIMITED GAMBLING, BETTING AND MATCH FIXING POLICY Swimming Australia Limited - Gambling, Betting and Match Fixing Policy Page 1 CONTENTS PAGE BACKGROUND 3 REVIEW HISTORY 4 GAMBLING,
More informationUnder the terms of Article 161c of the Constitution, the Assembly of the Republic hereby decrees the following: Chapter I GENERAL PROVISIONS
LAW GOVERNING THE EXERCISE OF THE RIGHT OF PETITION Note: Text of Law no. 43/90, as published in Series I of Diário da República no. 184 dated 10 August 1990, and amended by Laws nos. 6/93, 15/2003 and
More informationGAMBLING LICENSING ABIGAIL HUDSON NOVEMBER 2015
GAMBLING LICENSING ABIGAIL HUDSON NOVEMBER 2015 Gambling Act 2005 The objectives of the Gambling Commission and Licensing Authorities are defined as: Preventing gambling from being a source of crime or
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA Citation: Between: And Toor v. Harding, 2013 BCSC 1202 Amrit Toor and Intech Engineering Ltd. Date: 20130705 Docket: S125365 Registry: Vancouver Plaintiffs Thomas
More informationBefore : Mr Justice Morgan - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Between :
Neutral Citation Number: [2014] EWHC 3848 (Ch) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE CHANCERY DIVISION 1 Case No: HC12A02388 Royal Courts of Justice, Rolls Building Fetter Lane, London, EC4A 1NL Date: Tuesday,
More informationTABLE OF CONTENTS. CIE NCP Review of TAB Ltd Legislation 21. 3.4 Regulation of the Racing & Betting Industry 36. Responsible Gambling Legislation 40
TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1 2 INTRODUCTION 2.1 Purpose of This Report 17 2.2 Need for Review 17 2.3 National Competition Policy 18 2.4 Review Process 19 Terms of Reference 19 Steering Committee
More informationFreedom of information guidance Exemptions guidance Section 41 Information provided in confidence
Freedom of information guidance Exemptions guidance Section 41 Information provided in confidence 14 May 2008 Contents Introduction 2 What information may be covered by this exemption? 3 Was the information
More informationCommunications Law Centre, UTS. Submission to draft Commercial Radio Code of Practice 9- Promotion of Live Odds in Sports Coverage
Communications Law Centre, UTS Submission to draft Commercial Radio Code of Practice 9- Promotion of Live Odds in Sports Coverage 21/12/2012 Table of Contents Executive Summary... 1 1. Introduction...
More informationCompetition Policy Review Issues Paper. Submission by Australian Corporate Lawyers Association
Competition Policy Review Issues Paper Submission by Australian Corporate Lawyers Association Professor Ian Harper Chair of the Review Panel Competition Policy Review Canberra ACT 2600 Dear Professor Harper
More informationPOSSIBLE COMMERCE CLAUSE CLAIMS RELATED TO STATE TOLLING OF EXISTING INTERSTATES
POSSIBLE COMMERCE CLAUSE CLAIMS RELATED TO STATE TOLLING OF EXISTING INTERSTATES INTRODUCTION In addition to legal claims related to a state s authority to toll existing roads under federal law (see LEGAL
More informationTax Relief for Gifts To European Charities. UK tax law provides a number of reliefs and exemptions connected to charities.
Tax Relief for Gifts To European Charities Introduction UK tax law provides a number of reliefs and exemptions connected to charities. For example, the Gift Aid scheme allows donations to be deducted from
More informationEmployment law legal analysis - Must employers redeploy redundant employees?
Employment law legal analysis - Must employers redeploy redundant employees? By Andrew Steele April 2013 This article looks at an employer s obligation to redeploy an employee to a different position in
More information