The Grain Pool of WA v The Commonwealth [2000] HCA 14

HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA

GLEESON CJ,

GAUDRON, McHUGH, GUMMOW, KIRBY, HAYNE AND CALLINAN JJ

THE GRAIN POOL OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA PLAINTIFF

AND

THE COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA & ANOR DEFENDANTS

The Grain Pool of WA v The Commonwealth [2000] HCA 14

23 March 2000

P34/1998

ORDER

1. The questions reserved on 18 June 1999 are answered as follows:

(a) Is the Plant Variety Rights Act 1987 (Cth) or any part thereof invalid in that it is not supported by s 51(xviii), (xxix) or (xxxix) of the Constitution or any other head of Commonwealth power?

Answer: No, it was supported by s 51(xviii) of the Constitution. It is unnecessary to decide whether it was supported by any other head of Commonwealth power.

(b) Is the Plant Breeder's Rights Act 1994 (Cth) or any part thereof invalid in that it is not supported by s 51(xviii), (xxix) or (xxxix) of the Constitution or any other head of Commonwealth power?

Answer: No, it is supported by s 51(xviii) of the Constitution. It is unnecessary to decide whether it is supported by any other head of Commonwealth power.

2. Costs of the questions reserved to be dealt with by the Justice disposing of the action.

2.

Representation:

G Griffith QC with W Harris for the plaintiff (instructed by Mallesons Stephen Jaques)

D M Bennett QC, Solicitor-General of the Commonwealth with K J Howard and A R Beech for the first defendant (instructed by Australian Government Solicitor)

T A Gray QC with R A Cameron and M A Perry for the second defendant (instructed by Corsers)

Interveners:

W C R Bale QC, Solicitor-General of the State of Tasmania with S B Kaye intervening on behalf of the Attorney-General of the State of Tasmania (instructed by Crown Solicitor for Tasmania)

R J Meadows QC, Solicitor-General for the State of Western Australia with R M Mitchell intervening on behalf of the Attorney-General for the State of Western Australia (instructed by Crown Solicitor for Western Australia)