LUTON v LESSELS
&
ANOR
Members:
Gleeson CJ
Gaudron J
McHugh J
Kirby J
Hayne J
Callinan J
Tribunal:
Full High Court of Australia
MEDIA NEUTRAL CITATION:
[2002] HCA 13
Decision date:
11 April 2002
McHugh J
79. I agree with the answers proposed by Gleeson CJ to the questions reserved for consideration by the Full Court of this Court and with his Honour's reasons for answering the questions in the manner that he does.
80. I would only add that the amounts collected by the Registrar do not acquire the characterisation of ``taxation'' merely because they form part of the Consolidated Revenue Fund. Before the decision in
Australian Tape Manufacturers Association Ltd v The Commonwealth
,
[98]
(1993) 176 CLR 480.
it might have been thought that no imposition could be a tax unless it formed part of the Consolidated Revenue Fund. But the decision in that case denied that proposition. Whether or not that case was correctly decided
-
and I remain of the view that it was wrongly decided
-
it does not follow that a compulsory exaction for a public purpose is a tax simply because it forms part of the Consolidated Revenue Fund. Penalties payable to the Commonwealth are compulsory exactions. Quite often fees payable to the Commonwealth are compulsory exactions. Because those penalties and fees are part of the
ATC 4325
``revenues or moneys raised or received by the Executive Government of the Commonwealth'',
[99]
Constitution, s 81.
they form part of the Consolidated Revenue Fund. But that fact does not by itself mean that they are taxes. If there were any doubt about that point, s 53 of the Constitution quashes it. That section declares that ``a proposed law shall not be taken... to impose taxation, by reason only of its containing provisions for the imposition... of fines or other pecuniary penalties, or for the demand or payment... of fees for licences, or fees for services under the proposed law''.
Footnotes
[98]
(1993) 176 CLR 480.
[99]
Constitution, s 81.
