External Affairs Power Flashcards

1
Q

What is a nexus?

A

Connection b/w 2 places where a law must have a reason to be enacted if it affects the state

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

What are Extraterrestrial Powers?

A

Parliament legislates w respect to acts or matters beyond its borders

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

What is the ‘nexus requirement?’

A
  • British colonies always seen to have a ‘nexus’ when legislating –> Real nexus is still needed for extraterritorial legislation
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

What are State Limits?

A
  • Extraterritorial power of States may be limited where the exercise of powers interferes unduly w the legislative powers of another State
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

What section allows Commonwealth to legislate w foreign nations?

A

s.51

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

What are the 4 qualifications the Commonwealth must consider to implement Treaty Provisions?

A
  1. The need for a bona fide ratification = ‘good faith’ (assume good faith if no bad intentions are found)
  2. Need for a treaty obligation
  3. Need for sufficient specificity –> ILO case (cannot be vague)
  4. Need to implement legislation to conform to the treaty requirements –> implementing law MUST conform w the purpose of treaty –> ILO proportionality test
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

Does the Executive have power to ratify Treaties?

A

Yes –> w prerogative powers

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

Do the States have power to ratify treaties?

A

No –> lack international personality
e.g. agreement b/w AUS State and another country is seen as ‘international contract’ rather than ‘international treaty’

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

What are the consequences of ratification of a treaty?

A
  • Indicates AUS BOUND by international law
  • If a STATE breaches a treaty –> seen as commonwealth broke it since AUS is seen as ‘one’ due to federation
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

Does international law affect AUS Domestic Law?

A

No –> unless specifically incorporated into AUS law by Parliament
- Can still end up INFLUENCING judge’s interpretation of AUS law

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

The treaties can only be implemented into AUS Domestic Law if it is in ‘good ….’

A

Faith!

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

Are AUS bound by other international documents?

A
  • Not at all! They are merely ‘aspirational’ such as ‘recommendations, Declaration’
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

What is the significance of the Polyukhovich case?

A

Confirmed external affairs powers allows Commonwealth to legislate matters outside AUS –> even retrospective cases

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

Significance of XYZ case?

A

Tested whether Commonwealth could legislate under s.51 Crimes Act overseas (external affairs power)
–> Reaffirmed broad scope of external affairs power under s.51

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

Significance of Koowarta?

A

Racial Discrimination Act challenged –> statute incorporated provisions of International Convention which AUS ratified
- Majority upheld that Commonwealth could implement ANY treaty obligation regardless of subject matter
- Minority dissented and argued could only implement if it was ‘external affair,’ meaning it concerned extraterritorial matters

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

Significance of Tasmanian Dam Case (lead on from Koowarta)

A
  • Majority upheld Commonwealth’s use of external affair –> reinforce that Commonwealth could implement International treaties into AUS Law

–> Overall expand broad scope of AUS power

17
Q

Significance of ILO case?

A

Determined whether Commonwealth could pass laws based on International Treaties if they were vague?

  • Court suggested that it MUST be specific in its obligations