High Court Registry closure

The High Court Registry will be closed from 4.00pm on Wednesday, 24 December 2025 and will re-open at 9:00am on Friday, 2 January 2026.

Any party seeking to file a document due to be filed between 25 December 2025 and 1 January 2026 has an automatic extension of time under the  High Court Rules 2004 (Rule 4.01.5) until 4:00pm on Friday, 2 January 2026 to file the document. Any documents lodged between 25 December 2025 and 1 January 2026 will be reviewed on 2 January 2026.

All inquiries for the High Court will be considered when the Registry re-opens on Friday, 2 January 2026.If a matter is of extreme urgency, you may telephone 1800 570 566, select Option 1 and leave a voicemail. In addition provide details by email to: registry@hcourt.gov.au.

Vanderstock v Victoria

[2023] HCA 30
Judgment date
Case number
M61/2021
Before
Kiefel CJ, Gageler, Gordon, Edelman, Steward, Gleeson, Jagot JJ
Catchwords

Constitutional law (Cth) – Duties of excise – Exclusive power of Commonwealth Parliament – Scope and operation of s 90 of Constitution – Where s 7(1) of Zero and Low Emission Vehicle Distance-based Charge Act 2021 (Vic) ("ZLEV Charge Act") purported to oblige registered operator of zero or low emissions vehicle ("ZLEV") to pay charge for use of ZLEV on "specified roads" ("ZLEV charge") – Where "specified roads" defined to include all roads in Victoria and elsewhere in Australia over which public has right of way – Where ZLEV charge a debt due by registered operator to Victoria – Where question of law stated for opinion of Full Court as to whether s 7(1) of ZLEV Charge Act invalid for imposing duty of excise within meaning of s 90 of Constitution – Whether ZLEV charge properly characterised as tax on goods – Whether definition of duty of excise stated in Capital Duplicators Pty Ltd v Australian Capital Territory [No 2] (1993) 178 CLR 561 and Ha v New South Wales (1997) 189 CLR 465 as tax on production, manufacture, sale or distribution of goods exhaustive or descriptive – Where application for leave to reopen Capital Duplicators [No 2] and Ha refused – Whether inland tax on goods imposed at stage of consumption answers description of duty of excise – Whether Dickenson's Arcade Pty Ltd v Tasmania (1974) 130 CLR 177 should be reopened and overruled.

Words and phrases – "affect goods as articles of commerce", "articles of commerce", "close relation to goods", "commodities", "constitutional fact", "consumer", "consumption", "consumption tax", "criterion of liability", "dealing in goods", "direct tax", "distance-based charge", "distribution", "duty of customs", "duty of excise", "electric vehicle", "excise", "exclusive power", "imposts on goods", "incidence of tax", "indirect tax", "inland tax on goods", "manufacture", "markets in goods", "natural tendency", "point of consumption", "point of receipt by the consumer", "price of goods", "production", "sales tax", "stage of consumption", "stream of production and distribution", "tax on commodities", "tax on consumption", "tax on distribution", "tax on goods", "tax on manufacture", "tax on production", "tax on sale of goods", "tendency to depress demand for goods", "trading tax", "zero or low emissions vehicle".

Constitution – ss 51(ii), 51(iii), 53, 55, 86, 87, 88, 90, 92, 93, 109.

Road Safety Act 1986 (Vic) – s 3.

Zero and Low Emission Vehicle Distance –based Charge Act 2021 (Vic), ss 3, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 15, 18, 19.

Files
30.docx (584.62 KB)
30.pdf (2.2 MB)