Matches in DBpedia 2015-10 for { <http://dbpedia.org/resource/Bolton_v_Madsen> ?p ?o }
Showing triples 1 to 56 of
56
with 100 triples per page.
- Bolton_v_Madsen abstract "Bolton v Madsen (1963) 110 CLR 264 is a High Court of Australia case that dealt with section 90 of the Australian Constitution, which prohibits States from levying excise duty.This case followed Dennis Hotels Pty Ltd v Victoria. It upheld the broad approach to excise, that is, excise duties are taxes on goods at some stage in their production or distribution before they reach consumers. Furthermore, the case supported the criterion of liability approach, that is, a tax must be applied directly to the goods. The judges gave some guidance on the required relationship; the relationship is satisfied "if the tax is calculated by reference to the quantity or value of goods produced or dealt with in the relevant period" (as summarised by Mason J in Hematite Petroleum Pty Ltd v Victoria). This approach, of ensuring that the burden is down the line ensures that it is conformant with the original description of excise in Peterswald v Bartley. The mere fact that there was an increase in the price of goods is insufficient.".
- Bolton_v_Madsen thumbnail Australian_Coat_of_Arms.png?width=300.
- Bolton_v_Madsen wikiPageExternalLink 110clr264.html.
- Bolton_v_Madsen wikiPageID "5634686".
- Bolton_v_Madsen wikiPageLength "2460".
- Bolton_v_Madsen wikiPageOutDegree "23".
- Bolton_v_Madsen wikiPageRevisionID "659971741".
- Bolton_v_Madsen wikiPageWikiLink Alan_Taylor_(judge).
- Bolton_v_Madsen wikiPageWikiLink Alan_Taylor_(jurist).
- Bolton_v_Madsen wikiPageWikiLink Australian_constitutional_law.
- Bolton_v_Madsen wikiPageWikiLink Category:1963_in_Australian_law.
- Bolton_v_Madsen wikiPageWikiLink Category:1963_in_case_law.
- Bolton_v_Madsen wikiPageWikiLink Category:Australian_constitutional_law.
- Bolton_v_Madsen wikiPageWikiLink Category:Excise_in_the_Australian_Constitution_cases.
- Bolton_v_Madsen wikiPageWikiLink Category:High_Court_of_Australia_cases.
- Bolton_v_Madsen wikiPageWikiLink Commonwealth_Law_Reports.
- Bolton_v_Madsen wikiPageWikiLink Constitution_of_Australia.
- Bolton_v_Madsen wikiPageWikiLink Dennis_Hotels_Pty_Ltd_v_Victoria.
- Bolton_v_Madsen wikiPageWikiLink Douglas_Menzies.
- Bolton_v_Madsen wikiPageWikiLink Excise.
- Bolton_v_Madsen wikiPageWikiLink Frank_Kitto.
- Bolton_v_Madsen wikiPageWikiLink George_Winterton.
- Bolton_v_Madsen wikiPageWikiLink Hematite_Petroleum_Pty_Ltd_v_Victoria.
- Bolton_v_Madsen wikiPageWikiLink High_Court_of_Australia.
- Bolton_v_Madsen wikiPageWikiLink Owen_Dixon.
- Bolton_v_Madsen wikiPageWikiLink Peterswald_v_Bartley.
- Bolton_v_Madsen wikiPageWikiLink Section_90_of_the_Constitution_of_Australia.
- Bolton_v_Madsen wikiPageWikiLink Victor_Windeyer.
- Bolton_v_Madsen wikiPageWikiLink William_Owen_(judge).
- Bolton_v_Madsen wikiPageWikiLinkText "Bolton v Madsen".
- Bolton_v_Madsen citations 110clr264.html.
- Bolton_v_Madsen court High_Court_of_Australia.
- Bolton_v_Madsen dateDecided "1963-06-06".
- Bolton_v_Madsen fullName "Bolton v Madsen".
- Bolton_v_Madsen hasPhotoCollection Bolton_v_Madsen.
- Bolton_v_Madsen judges "Dixon CJ, Kitto, Taylor, Menzies, Windeyer and Owen JJ".
- Bolton_v_Madsen name "Bolton v Madsen".
- Bolton_v_Madsen opinions "The broad approach and the criterion of liability approach to excise were approved".
- Bolton_v_Madsen priorActions "none".
- Bolton_v_Madsen subsequentActions "none".
- Bolton_v_Madsen wikiPageUsesTemplate Template:Infobox_court_case.
- Bolton_v_Madsen subject Category:1963_in_Australian_law.
- Bolton_v_Madsen subject Category:1963_in_case_law.
- Bolton_v_Madsen subject Category:Australian_constitutional_law.
- Bolton_v_Madsen subject Category:Excise_in_the_Australian_Constitution_cases.
- Bolton_v_Madsen subject Category:High_Court_of_Australia_cases.
- Bolton_v_Madsen hypernym Court.
- Bolton_v_Madsen type Person.
- Bolton_v_Madsen comment "Bolton v Madsen (1963) 110 CLR 264 is a High Court of Australia case that dealt with section 90 of the Australian Constitution, which prohibits States from levying excise duty.This case followed Dennis Hotels Pty Ltd v Victoria. It upheld the broad approach to excise, that is, excise duties are taxes on goods at some stage in their production or distribution before they reach consumers.".
- Bolton_v_Madsen label "Bolton v Madsen".
- Bolton_v_Madsen sameAs m.0dxfdd.
- Bolton_v_Madsen sameAs Q4940253.
- Bolton_v_Madsen sameAs Q4940253.
- Bolton_v_Madsen wasDerivedFrom Bolton_v_Madsen?oldid=659971741.
- Bolton_v_Madsen depiction Australian_Coat_of_Arms.png.
- Bolton_v_Madsen isPrimaryTopicOf Bolton_v_Madsen.