Matches in DBpedia 2016-04 for { <http://dbpedia.org/resource/Matthews_v_Chicory_Marketing_Board_(Vic)> ?p ?o }
Showing triples 1 to 58 of
58
with 100 triples per page.
- Matthews_v_Chicory_Marketing_Board_(Vic) abstract "Matthews v Chicory Marketing Board (Vic) (1938) 60 CLR 263 is a High Court of Australia case that considered section 90 of the Australian Constitution, which prohibits States from levying excise (taxes). Although the meaning of excise was considered in Peterswald v Bartley, this case significantly broadened its reach.In this case, the law in question was a Victorian tax on producers of chicory, which was measured at the rate of one pound per half-acre, of land planted with the crop. The minority in this case, consisting of Latham CJ and McTiernan J, followed the Peterswald definition and held that an excise must have some relation to the quantity or value of the goods.On the contrary, the majority, whose principal judgment was delivered by Dixon J, allowed this extension. After examining the history of excise in England, his Honour concluded that the definition in Peterswald may be too narrow. All that is required is that the \"tax must bear a close relation to the production or manufacture, the sale or the consumption of goods and must be of such a nature as to affect them as the subjects of manufacture or production or as articles of commerce\". Hence, although the tax in this case did not directly refer to the quantity or value of the chicory produced, the land area has a \"natural, although not a necessary\" relation to the quantity produced, and it is a \"controlling element\". This was formulated with reference to the framers of the Constitution, who adopted an excise as \"a tax directly affecting commodities\".".
- Matthews_v_Chicory_Marketing_Board_(Vic) thumbnail Coat_of_Arms_of_Australia.svg?width=300.
- Matthews_v_Chicory_Marketing_Board_(Vic) wikiPageExternalLink 38.html.
- Matthews_v_Chicory_Marketing_Board_(Vic) wikiPageID "5621144".
- Matthews_v_Chicory_Marketing_Board_(Vic) wikiPageLength "3081".
- Matthews_v_Chicory_Marketing_Board_(Vic) wikiPageOutDegree "26".
- Matthews_v_Chicory_Marketing_Board_(Vic) wikiPageRevisionID "688992245".
- Matthews_v_Chicory_Marketing_Board_(Vic) wikiPageWikiLink Australian_constitutional_law.
- Matthews_v_Chicory_Marketing_Board_(Vic) wikiPageWikiLink Australian_pound.
- Matthews_v_Chicory_Marketing_Board_(Vic) wikiPageWikiLink Category:1938_in_Australian_law.
- Matthews_v_Chicory_Marketing_Board_(Vic) wikiPageWikiLink Category:1938_in_case_law.
- Matthews_v_Chicory_Marketing_Board_(Vic) wikiPageWikiLink Category:Australian_constitutional_law.
- Matthews_v_Chicory_Marketing_Board_(Vic) wikiPageWikiLink Category:Excise_in_the_Australian_Constitution_cases.
- Matthews_v_Chicory_Marketing_Board_(Vic) wikiPageWikiLink Category:High_Court_of_Australia_cases.
- Matthews_v_Chicory_Marketing_Board_(Vic) wikiPageWikiLink Chicory.
- Matthews_v_Chicory_Marketing_Board_(Vic) wikiPageWikiLink Commonwealth_Law_Reports.
- Matthews_v_Chicory_Marketing_Board_(Vic) wikiPageWikiLink Constitution_of_Australia.
- Matthews_v_Chicory_Marketing_Board_(Vic) wikiPageWikiLink Edward_McTiernan.
- Matthews_v_Chicory_Marketing_Board_(Vic) wikiPageWikiLink England.
- Matthews_v_Chicory_Marketing_Board_(Vic) wikiPageWikiLink Excise.
- Matthews_v_Chicory_Marketing_Board_(Vic) wikiPageWikiLink Framer.
- Matthews_v_Chicory_Marketing_Board_(Vic) wikiPageWikiLink George_Rich.
- Matthews_v_Chicory_Marketing_Board_(Vic) wikiPageWikiLink George_Winterton.
- Matthews_v_Chicory_Marketing_Board_(Vic) wikiPageWikiLink Hayden_Starke.
- Matthews_v_Chicory_Marketing_Board_(Vic) wikiPageWikiLink High_Court_of_Australia.
- Matthews_v_Chicory_Marketing_Board_(Vic) wikiPageWikiLink John_Latham_(judge).
- Matthews_v_Chicory_Marketing_Board_(Vic) wikiPageWikiLink Owen_Dixon.
- Matthews_v_Chicory_Marketing_Board_(Vic) wikiPageWikiLink Peterswald_v_Bartley.
- Matthews_v_Chicory_Marketing_Board_(Vic) wikiPageWikiLink Section_90_of_the_Constitution_of_Australia.
- Matthews_v_Chicory_Marketing_Board_(Vic) wikiPageWikiLink Victoria_(Australia).
- Matthews_v_Chicory_Marketing_Board_(Vic) wikiPageWikiLinkText "''Matthews v Chicory''".
- Matthews_v_Chicory_Marketing_Board_(Vic) wikiPageWikiLinkText "Matthews v Chicory Marketing Board (Vic)".
- Matthews_v_Chicory_Marketing_Board_(Vic) citations 38.html.
- Matthews_v_Chicory_Marketing_Board_(Vic) court High_Court_of_Australia.
- Matthews_v_Chicory_Marketing_Board_(Vic) dateDecided "1938-08-09".
- Matthews_v_Chicory_Marketing_Board_(Vic) fullName "Matthews v The Chicory Marketing Board".
- Matthews_v_Chicory_Marketing_Board_(Vic) judges "Latham CJ, Rich, Starke, Dixon and McTiernan JJ".
- Matthews_v_Chicory_Marketing_Board_(Vic) name "Matthews v Chicory Marketing Board".
- Matthews_v_Chicory_Marketing_Board_(Vic) opinions "The tax on producers of chicory calculated by land area was found to be an excise".
- Matthews_v_Chicory_Marketing_Board_(Vic) priorActions "none".
- Matthews_v_Chicory_Marketing_Board_(Vic) subsequentActions "none".
- Matthews_v_Chicory_Marketing_Board_(Vic) wikiPageUsesTemplate Template:Infobox_court_case.
- Matthews_v_Chicory_Marketing_Board_(Vic) wikiPageUsesTemplate Template:Italics_title.
- Matthews_v_Chicory_Marketing_Board_(Vic) subject Category:1938_in_Australian_law.
- Matthews_v_Chicory_Marketing_Board_(Vic) subject Category:1938_in_case_law.
- Matthews_v_Chicory_Marketing_Board_(Vic) subject Category:Australian_constitutional_law.
- Matthews_v_Chicory_Marketing_Board_(Vic) subject Category:Excise_in_the_Australian_Constitution_cases.
- Matthews_v_Chicory_Marketing_Board_(Vic) subject Category:High_Court_of_Australia_cases.
- Matthews_v_Chicory_Marketing_Board_(Vic) hypernym Court.
- Matthews_v_Chicory_Marketing_Board_(Vic) type Place.
- Matthews_v_Chicory_Marketing_Board_(Vic) comment "Matthews v Chicory Marketing Board (Vic) (1938) 60 CLR 263 is a High Court of Australia case that considered section 90 of the Australian Constitution, which prohibits States from levying excise (taxes). Although the meaning of excise was considered in Peterswald v Bartley, this case significantly broadened its reach.In this case, the law in question was a Victorian tax on producers of chicory, which was measured at the rate of one pound per half-acre, of land planted with the crop.".
- Matthews_v_Chicory_Marketing_Board_(Vic) label "Matthews v Chicory Marketing Board (Vic)".
- Matthews_v_Chicory_Marketing_Board_(Vic) sameAs Q6791501.
- Matthews_v_Chicory_Marketing_Board_(Vic) sameAs m.0dwrj5.
- Matthews_v_Chicory_Marketing_Board_(Vic) sameAs Q6791501.
- Matthews_v_Chicory_Marketing_Board_(Vic) wasDerivedFrom Matthews_v_Chicory_Marketing_Board_(Vic)?oldid=688992245.
- Matthews_v_Chicory_Marketing_Board_(Vic) depiction Coat_of_Arms_of_Australia.svg.
- Matthews_v_Chicory_Marketing_Board_(Vic) isPrimaryTopicOf Matthews_v_Chicory_Marketing_Board_(Vic).