Priestley 11 · Usually second year
Constitutional Law for Australian law students
Constitutional Law is taught as a sequence of High Court decisions rather than as a set of rules, which is why the reading is long and the exam is short. Characterisation and inconsistency come up in almost every assessment, and the implied freedom of political communication is the doctrine students are most often asked to argue about.
What the subject covers
- Federalism, and the division of legislative power between the Commonwealth and the states
- Characterisation of Commonwealth heads of power
- Section 109 inconsistency
- The separation of judicial power, at Commonwealth and state level
- Express and implied rights and freedoms, including the implied freedom of political communication
- Intergovernmental immunities
- State constitutional law and the position of state Supreme Courts
Topic coverage varies between law schools and between jurisdictions. Your subject guide is the one that counts.
Cases you will meet in an Australian Constitutional Law course
Three decisions that turn up in Constitutional Law across Australian law schools. Some of them are English decisions that Australian courses still teach as core authority, so this is a list of what you will be taught rather than a list of Australian judgments. Treat it as a starting point rather than a reading list. Your course sets its own, and it is the one that counts.
Amalgamated Society of Engineers v Adelaide Steamship Co Ltd
(1920) 28 CLR 129
The Engineers case, and the approach to construing Commonwealth power.
Lange v Australian Broadcasting Corporation
(1997) 189 CLR 520
The implied freedom of political communication, stated unanimously.
Kable v Director of Public Prosecutions (NSW)
(1996) 189 CLR 51
The limit on what state legislation may ask a state Supreme Court to do.
How the subject is assessed
A characterisation and inconsistency problem question is standard. Research essays usually ask whether a line of authority is defensible, and AGLC4 compliance is marked. The exam is normally open book and heavily time constrained.
Using CaseSharp for Constitutional
Problem questions
Characterise the law, test it against the head of power, then run section 109 and any relevant limitation. Open each cited authority and check the judgment before using a pinpoint.
Case notes
Constitutional decisions carry seven separate judgments more often than not. Briefs make it clear what the court held as against what an individual judge said.
AGLC4 essays
Constitutional essays often cite by judge and paragraph. CaseSharp's citation check (beta) suggests a draft footnote for each case citation it finds. Treat it as a draft you check against AGLC4 and the original source.
Exam scaffolds
Scaffold by head of power and by limitation. Check the citing cases for each authority before the exam, because this is the area where a case you learned in week 3 is most likely to have been reconsidered.
CaseSharp is a research and study tool. It does not write your problem question answer or your research essay. When a citation in your draft is not in CaseSharp's records, the citation check (beta) marks it for your review instead of guessing.
Try it on a Constitutional question
Create a free account and run a Constitutional query like the one below, so you can see what comes back before you decide anything.
implied freedom of political communication Lange
Australian decisions in CaseSharp’s collection. Coverage varies by court and date.