About: O'Sullivan v Noarlunga Meat Ltd (No 2)

Facets (new session)
Description
Metadata
Settings
- Rule:
- Inverse Functional Properties:
- "Same As":

About: O'Sullivan v Noarlunga Meat Ltd (No 2) Goto Sponge NotDistinct Permalink

An Entity of Type : yago:YagoPermanentlyLocatedEntity, within Data Space : dbpedia.org associated with source document(s)
QRcode icon

http://dbpedia.org/describe/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fdbpedia.org%2Fresource%2FO%27Sullivan_v_Noarlunga_Meat_Ltd_%28No_2%29

O'Sullivan v Noarlunga Meat Ltd (No 2), was a High Court of Australia case, in which a certificate, under s 74 of the Australian Constitution, was sought for leave to appeal to the Privy Council against the previous decision of O'Sullivan v Noarlunga Meat Ltd. Dixon CJ, Williams, Webb and Fullagar JJ wrote a joint judgment refusing a certificate of appeal stating that the policy of section 74 was to confine the decision of essentially federal questions to the High Court. McTiernan, Kitto and Taylor JJ each delivered concurring judgments.

Attributes	Values
rdf:type	yago:Abstraction100002137 yago:Case107308889 yago:Event100029378 yago:Happening107283608 yago:PsychologicalFeature100023100 yago:YagoPermanentlyLocatedEntity
rdfs:label	O'Sullivan v Noarlunga Meat Ltd (No 2) (en)
rdfs:comment	O'Sullivan v Noarlunga Meat Ltd (No 2), was a High Court of Australia case, in which a certificate, under s 74 of the Australian Constitution, was sought for leave to appeal to the Privy Council against the previous decision of O'Sullivan v Noarlunga Meat Ltd. Dixon CJ, Williams, Webb and Fullagar JJ wrote a joint judgment refusing a certificate of appeal stating that the policy of section 74 was to confine the decision of essentially federal questions to the High Court. McTiernan, Kitto and Taylor JJ each delivered concurring judgments. (en)
name	O'Sullivan v Noarlunga Meat Ltd (en)
foaf:depiction
dcterms:subject	Australian constitutional law History of agriculture in Australia Trade and commerce power in the Australian Constitution cases 1956 in case law High Court of Australia cases Meat industry 1956 in Australian law
Wikipage page ID	4890180 (xsd:integer)
Wikipage revision ID	1100111221 (xsd:integer)
Link from a Wikipage to another Wikipage	Australian constitutional law History of agriculture in Australia Judicial Committee of the Privy Council Dudley Williams (judge) Constitution of Australia Chief Justice of Australia Edward McTiernan Frank Kitto George Winterton Commonwealth Law Reports Australian constitutional law Wilfred Fullagar William Webb (judge) Alan Taylor (Australian judge) Trade and commerce power in the Australian Constitution cases Owen Dixon High Court of Australia 1956 in case law High Court of Australia cases Meat industry 1956 in Australian law Appeal Cases Law Reports O'Sullivan v Noarlunga Meat Ltd Justices Section 51(i) of the Australian Constitution
sameAs	O'Sullivan v Noarlunga Meat Ltd (No 2) O'Sullivan v Noarlunga Meat Ltd (No 2) O'Sullivan v Noarlunga Meat Ltd (No 2)
subsequent actions	; (en)
dbp:wikiPageUsesTemplate	dbt:Reflist dbt:Short_description dbt:Use_Australian_English dbt:Use_dmy_dates dbt:Italics_title dbt:Cite_AustLII dbt:Cite_BAILII dbt:Infobox_court_case
thumbnail	wiki-commons:Special:FilePath/Coat_of_Arms_of_Australia.svg?width=300
court	High Court of Australia
judges	Dixon CJ, McTiernan, Williams, Webb, Fullagar, Kitto and Taylor JJ (en)
has abstract	O'Sullivan v Noarlunga Meat Ltd (No 2), was a High Court of Australia case, in which a certificate, under s 74 of the Australian Constitution, was sought for leave to appeal to the Privy Council against the previous decision of O'Sullivan v Noarlunga Meat Ltd. In the preceding case, it was held that the Commonwealth's extensive regulations regarding premises used for the slaughtering of livestock for export were valid under s 51(i) of the Constitution. In June 1955 the Privy Council gave special leave to appeal except to the extent they required a certificate of appeal under section 74. O'Sullivan applied to the High Court for a certificate of appeal. Dixon CJ, Williams, Webb and Fullagar JJ wrote a joint judgment refusing a certificate of appeal stating that the policy of section 74 was to confine the decision of essentially federal questions to the High Court. McTiernan, Kitto and Taylor JJ each delivered concurring judgments. The Privy Council took a narrower view of section 74 than the High Court, holding that the question of whether laws were inconsistent involved the application of section 109 of the Constitution and did not involve a question in relation to the constitutional powers of the Commonwealth and the States. The Privy Council dismissed the appeal, approving the earlier decision of the statutory majority of the High Court, particularly the judgment of Fullager J. (en)
date decided	1956-10-13 (xsd:date)
opinions	The Court rejected an application to appeal to the Privy Council from the previous case. (en)
prior actions	O'Sullivan v Noarlunga Meat Ltd 92 CLR 565 (en)
prov:wasDerivedFrom	wikipedia-en:O'Sullivan_v_Noarlunga_Meat_Ltd_(No_2)?oldid=1100111221&ns=0
page length (characters) of wiki page	4586 (xsd:nonNegativeInteger)
foaf:isPrimaryTopicOf	wikipedia-en:O'Sullivan_v_Noarlunga_Meat_Ltd_(No_2)
is Link from a Wikipage to another Wikipage of	List of High Court of Australia cases O'Sullivan v Noarlunga Meat Ltd
is foaf:primaryTopic of	wikipedia-en:O'Sullivan_v_Noarlunga_Meat_Ltd_(No_2)

Faceted Search & Find service v1.17_git139 as of Feb 29 2024

Alternative Linked Data Documents: ODE Content Formats:

RDF

ODATA

Microdata

About

OpenLink Virtuoso version 08.03.3331 as of Sep 2 2024, on Linux (x86_64-generic-linux-glibc212), Single-Server Edition (62 GB total memory, 38 GB memory in use)
Data on this page belongs to its respective rights holders.
Virtuoso Faceted Browser Copyright © 2009-2024 OpenLink Software