Chief Executive Officer of Customs v El Hajje

Customs and excise – Averment provision - Whether ultimate fact in issue in an excise prosecution is not properly the subject-matter of an averment provision - Whether Excise Act 1901 (Cth), s 144(1) draws a distinction between an ultimate fact in issue and other facts - Whether primary judge erred in finding that the material in the respondent's possession, custody or control was manufactured or partly manufactured goods.

Constitutional law (Cth) – Whether the High Court should consider constitutional issues if not necessary to decide a case - Effect of absence of notice under Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth), s 78A.

Constitutional law (Cth) – Averment provisions - Compatibility of statutory averment provisions with the judicial power and functions provided for by Ch III of the Constitution.

Constitutional law (Cth) – Interpretation of Commonwealth statutes - Relevance of Constitution where not raised by parties - Whether High Court practice requires that constitutional questions not be considered in such cases - Whether any such consideration involves procedural unfairness to law officers entitled to notice of constitutional issues - Whether Constitution a necessary contextual consideration in interpretation of Commonwealth statutes.

Interpretation – Statutes - Federal legislation - Relevance of the Constitution (Cth) - Whether necessary contextual consideration influencing or affecting meaning of law - Whether failure of parties to raise issue obliges Court to ignore constitutional considerations - Whether procedural fairness, including failure of parties to give notice to law officers of constitutional questions, obliges Court to ignore any constitutional considerations not raised by parties.

Words and phrases – "averment", "excise duty", "ultimate fact in issue".

Constitution – Ch III.

Excise Act 1901 (Cth) – ss 117, 144.

Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth) – s 78A.

Excise Tariff Act 1921 (Cth).

Excise Tariff Amendment Act (No 1) 2000 (Cth).