Melbourne v Commonwealth [1947] HCA 26

of Forestry Chamber of & Commerce & 59 'ALD 485 gpl tad ALIS SS eg o Cons Appl i oi 'iad Vieoriav 'Hogeny crane Einon veal oD MPR wealth (Nod) OF AUSTRALIA. {354 31 Wing) Yomey Trin Shy Tite te Bln, — emir | Meme QiisionY Newham 91 Expanetust Saw Bevk of Wesremt hum ame Na eet BRT Le iat GATS wealth 58 06 ALIR 406 ue TGRA1 Consus Cone 'Appl Hans 'Cons Fe Aust Titoy Be be Audis co or ie) Pry Lid, Treas, pare SiR Si Fee) TAN? PBs Appl Re Sauron Fol 'enancies Trib 4 ia, State of NSW Seger Henderson, Re (HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA.] fealiig ERASE Gk Y Dis omancies fea THE LORD MAYOR, COUNCILLORS AND Prams : fp steed CYTIZENS OF THE CITY OF MELBOURNE * Hendra Re ieee Sees Cons AND Baumer Court pater is THE COMMONWEALTH AND ANOTHER . —. Derenpanrs. ALie32""° Constitutional Law (Cth.)—Legislative power of Commonwealth—Implied limitation H.C, oF A. hoa —Interference with governmental functions of States—Banking—* State bank- 1947. Aemmonwealt ing "—Statute—Validity—Banks not to "conduct any banking business for a Ww ABR DI State or for any authority of a State, including a local-governing authority" MELBOURNE,

Appl except with consent of Commonwealth Treasurer—Banking Act 1945 (No, 14 July 15, 16. Aommonwealt of 1945), s. 48.

BOSSE SYDNEY, : ia B. Section 48 of the Banking Act 1945 provides that " Except with the consent Aug, 13. str Come' in writing of the Treasurer, a bank shall not conduct any banking business for _|_——~ farses Gre, Z Latham OJ. 2007) 98 a State or for any authority of a State, including a local governing authority." Rich, Starke, ia J ic i illic i | McTiernan and Dist atv Held, by Latham O.1., Rich, Starke, Dizon and Williams JJ. (MeTiernan J. Metiernan pn pce al dissenting), that this section was not a valid exercise of the power in relation Co ad to "banking " conferred upon the Commonwealth Parliament by s. 51 (xiii.)