Re Dingjan; Ex parte Wagner [1995] HCA 16

High Court of Australia Mason CJ Brennan, Deane, Dawson, Toohey, Gaudron and McHugh JJ Re Dingjan; Ex parte Wagner [1995] HCA 16

ORDER Order nisi for writs of prohibition and certiorari made absolute.

Cur adv vult

[On 29 November 1994 the Court invited the parties and interveners to make submissions about s 7A of the Industrial Relations Act which came into operation after the conclusion of argument. The Court reconvened for that purpose on 14 February 1995.]

Cur adv vult

The following written judgments were delivered:—

16 March 1995 Mason CJ.

I would discharge the order nisi for the reasons given by Gaudron J, with which I agree.

I adhere to the view, which I have expressed on previous occasions, that the corporations power is not confined in its application to the trading activities of trading corporations and the financial activities of financial corporations [1] . The power must be construed as a plenary power with respect to the categories of corporations mentioned in s 51(xx) of the Constitution. On this view, the power is not limited to the regulation of the functions, activities and relationships of constitutional corporations, using that term in the sense in which it is used in the Industrial Relations Act 1988 Cth (the Act), which can be described as business functions, activities and relationships. Further, in my view, the power extends to the enactment of laws dealing with activities undertaken for the purposes of the business of a constitutional corporation [2] .

1. Actors and Announcers Equity Association of Australia v Fontana Films Pty Ltd (1982) 150 CLR 169 at 207(Aickin J concurring at 215); The Commonwealth v Tasmania (the Tasmanian Dam Case) (1983) 158 CLR 1 at 148-150; see also at 179, per Murphy J; at 270-271, per Deane J. 2. Tasmanian Dam Case (1983) 158 CLR 1 at 157.