Williams v Commonwealth (No 2)

Williams v Commonwealth of Australia [2014] HCA 23 (also known as Williams (No 2)) judgment of the High Court.[1] It is related to executive prerogative and spending in relation to the Australian Government's National School Chaplaincy Programme.

Williams v Commonwealth
CourtHigh Court of Australia
Full case nameWilliams v Commonwealth of Australia
Decided19 June 2014
Citation(s)[2014] HCA 23; 252 CLR 416
Case history
Prior action(s)Williams v Commonwealth of Australia [2012] HCA 23; 248 CLR 156
Court membership
Judge(s) sittingFrench CJ, Hayne, Crennan, Kiefel, Bell and Patrick Keane JJ

Background

Following the decision in Williams v Commonwealth (Williams (No 1)), the Commonwealth enacted the Financial Framework Legislation Amendment Act (No 3)[2] in an attempt to validate the National School Chaplaincy Programme and other similar Commonwealth spending programs.

Mr Williams brought new proceedings in the High Court challenging the validity the legislation's provisions and regulations, in particular, s 32B of the Financial Management and Accountability Act 1997 (Cth) (FMA Act), Part 5AA and Schedule 1AA of the Financial Management and Accountability Regulations 1997 (FMA Regulations) and item 9 of Schedule 1 to the Financial Framework Legislation Amendment Act (No 3) 2012 (the Financial Framework Amendment Act).

Judgment

The High Court unanimously upheld Mr William's challenge that the relevant provisions of the Financial Framework Legislation Amendment Act were invalid as they extended beyond the scope of Parliament's power under the Constitution.

The High Court rejected arguments by the Commonwealth that the provisions were valid as laws incidental to the powers to spend and to enter into contracts, finding that the laws needed to be grounded in a separate head of legislative power.

gollark: Ah. It is “Ammonium“.
gollark: @Drucifer Ever used the realistic terrain generation MC mod?
gollark: I got 161 levels overnight from that then lost them somehow.
gollark: No.
gollark: The nanobot thing isn't that bad since they do come back and I don't need them much.

References
  1. Williams v Commonwealth of Australia [2014] HCA 23
  2. See the Financial Framework Legislation Amendment Act (No 3) 2012 (Cth) s 32B
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.