Northern Suburbs General Cemetery Reserve Trust v Commonwealth [1993] HCA 12

High Court of Australia Mason C.J. Brennan, Deane, Dawson, Toohey, Gaudron and McHugh JJ. Northern Suburbs General Cemetery Reserve Trust v Commonwealth [1993] HCA 12

ORDER Demurrer allowed and action dismissed with costs.

Cur. adv. vult.

The following written judgments were delivered:—

1993, March 11 Mason C.J., Deane, Toohey and Gaudron JJ.

This demurrer raises for decision the validity of the Training Guarantee Act 1990 Cth ("the Act") and the Training Guarantee (Administration) Act 1990 Cth ("the Administration Act"). The long title of the Act, which comprises seven sections only, describes it as an "Act to impose a charge equal to any shortfall in the amount spent by employers on training employees". The Act does little more than impose and fix the amount of the charge (ss. 5, 6). The Act incorporates the Administration Act and provides that it is to be read as one with the Act [1] . The long title of the Administration Act describes it as an "Act relating to the establishment and administration of the Training Guarantee Scheme, and for other purposes". The relationship between the two Acts is therefore similar to that between an Act imposing taxation and an Act dealing with the imposition of taxation, the division of operation guarding against any violation of the provisions of s. 55 of the Constitution [2] .

1. s. 3. As to the effect of such a provision, see Moore v The Commonwealth (1951), 82 C.L.R. 547, at p. 565; State Chamber of Commerce and Industry v The Commonwealth (the Second Fringe Benefits Tax Case) (1987), 163 C.L.R. 329, at pp. 344-345. 2. See Moore v The Commonwealth (1951), 82 C.L.R., at pp. 565, 572-573, 579-580; Re Dymond (1959), 101 C.L.R. 11, at p. 18.

The objects of the Administration Act, as stated in s. 3 of that Act, are as follows: