Attorney-General (Vic) ex rel Dale v Commonwealth
Attorney-General (Vic); Ex rel Dale v Commonwealth (1945) 71 CLR 237 - commonly known as the "Pharmaceutical Benefits case"[1][2] - was a High Court of Australia decision. The case dealt with limits of the powers of the Australian Federal Government under section 81 of the Australian Constitution to take and spend money by legislation, in this case to fund reduced prices for prescription medicines.[3][4]
Background
In 1944, the Labor Federal Government of Prime Minister Ben Chifley bill for the "Pharmaceutical Benefits Act 1944" received Royal Assent.[5] The law was immediately challenged by the Attorney general of Victoria on behalf of the Victorian Medical Association and a number of medical doctors including one Dr Dale.[3]
Decision
The first matter to be decided was whether a state Attorney General had "standing" to intercede in a Commonwealth matter. Justice Dixon led the court in finding there was standing.[3] On the substantial matter of the constitutionality of "Pharmaceutical Benefits Act 1944", the court was split. Only Justice McTeirnan's decision was unambiguously for the Commonwealth.[3] Chief Justice Latham, Justices Starke, Williams and Rich wrote non-determinative judgments with respect to "standing", but nevertheless determined that the Pharmaceutical Benefits Act 1944 was beyond the scope of the powers granted to the Federal Government in section 81 of the Constitution of Australia.[3][4]
Later case
The ambiguity was finally determined in British Medical Association v Commonwealth (1949) 79 CLR 201, the "Second Pharmaceutical Benefits case" of 1949.[3][6]
See also
References
- ^ Carrol; Stellios (19 October 2009). "Pape and government spending - no cause for alarm". Clayton Utz. Retrieved 15 April 2010.
- ^ "Attorney-General (Vic); Ex rel Dale v Commonwealth ("Pharmaceutical Benefits case") (1945) HCA 30; (1945) 71 CLR 237 (19 November 1945)". Austlii. Retrieved 15 April 2010.
- ^ a b c d e f Galligan, Brian (1987). "4". Politics of the High Court. University of Queensland Press. pp. 150–154.
{{cite book}}:|access-date=requires|url=(help) - ^ a b Lawson, Charles (2008). Melbourne University Law Review. 32 (3). Melbourne University Law Review http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/sinodisp/au/journals/MULR/2008/28.html_Heading206.
{{cite journal}}: External link in|publisher=|title=(help) - ^ "The Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme – an Overview". Library of the Parliament of Australia. 2 January 2003. Retrieved 15 April 2010.
- ^ "British Medical Association v Commonwealth [1949] HCA 44; (1949) 79 CLR 201 (7 October 1949)". Austlii. Retrieved 16 April 2010.
 | This article related to Australian law is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it. |
 | This case law article is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it. |