Unions NSW v New South Wales [2013] HCA 58

HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA

FRENCH CJ, HAYNE, CRENNAN, KIEFEL, BELL AND KEANE JJ

UNIONS NSW & ORS PLAINTIFFS

AND

STATE OF NEW SOUTH WALES DEFENDANT

Unions NSW v New South Wales [2013] HCA 58 18 December 2013 S70/2013

ORDER

The questions asked by the parties in the Special Case dated 12 August 2013, as amended, be answered as follows:

Question 1

Is s 96D of the Election Funding, Expenditure and Disclosures Act 1981 (NSW) invalid because it impermissibly burdens the implied freedom of communication on governmental and political matters, contrary to the Commonwealth Constitution?

Answer

Yes.

Question 2

Is s 95G(6) of the Election Funding, Expenditure and Disclosures Act 1981 (NSW) invalid because it impermissibly burdens the implied freedom of communication on governmental and political matters, contrary to the Commonwealth Constitution?

Answer

Yes.

Question 3

Do ss 7A and 7B of the Constitution Act 1902 (NSW) give rise to an entrenched protection of freedom of communication on New South Wales State government and political matters?

Answer

Unnecessary to answer.

Question 4

If so, is s 96D of the Election Funding, Expenditure and Disclosures Act 1981 (NSW) invalid because it impermissibly burdens that freedom, contrary to the New South Wales Constitution?

Answer

Unnecessary to answer.

Question 5

Further, if the answer to question 3 is "yes", is s 95G(6) of the Election Funding, Expenditure and Disclosures Act 1981 (NSW) invalid because it impermissibly burdens that freedom, contrary to the New South Wales Constitution?

Answer

Unnecessary to answer.

Question 6

Is s 96D of the Election Funding, Expenditure and Disclosures Act 1981 (NSW) invalid under s 109 of the Commonwealth Constitution by reason of it being inconsistent with s 327 of the Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918 (Cth)?