Cullis v Ahern [1914] HCA 59 — BarristerAI

Cullis v Ahern

(1914) 18 CLR 540; [1914] HCA 59

High Court of Australia19 October 1914

Ratio Decidendi

A by-law requiring vehicles to carry a rear light between sunset and sunrise is within a municipal power to make by-laws 'for the good rule and government of the town.'

Judges

Griffith CJ, Isaacs J, Powers J

Quick Take

A State statute prescribing minimum obligations does not, without more, preclude municipal by-laws imposing additional requirements in the same subject area; inconsistency requires the statute to prescribe completely and exclusively the limits of obligation.

Headnote

No headnote yet — we'll generate the full structured AI headnote for you.

Generate the headnote

Free trial · no card required

Legal Areas

Constitutional Law - Federal-State Relations

Linked Principles

Legal principles extracted from this case

01A by-law requiring vehicles to carry a rear light between sunset and sunrise is within a municipal power to make by-laws 'for the good rule and government of the town.'
02
03
04

Start free trial

Free trial — no card required

Case Details

Citation[1914] HCA 59

Reported(1914) 18 CLR 540

CourtHCA

JurisdictionCommonwealth

Decision Date19 October 1914

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

Start free trial

No card · cancel anytime

Judgment

Judges

Griffith CJ · Isaacs J · Powers J

Reported

(1914) 18 CLR 540

Subsequent Judicial Consideration5›

Cases that have considered Cullis v Ahern

Referred to (5)

Dunne v P [2004] WASCA 239 Elachi v Council of the City of Shoalhaven [2016] NSWCA 15 Plaintiff M47-2012 v Director General of Security [2012] HCA 46 Bone v Mothershaw [2002] QCA 120 Clyde Engineering Co Ltd v Cowburn [1926] HCA 6

Judicial Consideration (Chronological)

Dunne v P [2004] WASCA 239Referred to

Elachi v Council of the City of Shoalhaven [2016] NSWCA 15Referred to

Plaintiff M47-2012 v Director General of Security [2012] HCA 46Referred to

Bone v Mothershaw [2002] QCA 120Referred to

Clyde Engineering Co Ltd v Cowburn [1926] HCA 6Referred to

The principle of proportionality in sentencing requires that the sentence imposed bear a reasonable relationship to the objective gravity of the offence, having regard to the maximum penalty prescribed by the legislature as an indicator of the seriousness with which Parliament regards the offence

The principle of proportionality in sentencing requires that the sentence imposed bear a reasonable relationship to the objective gravity of the offence, having regard to the maximum penalty prescribed by the legislature as an indicator of the seriousness with which Parliament regards the offence.

Cullis v Ahern at [30]

A court exercising federal jurisdiction may grant an anti-suit injunction to restrain foreign proceedings only where the continuation of those proceedings would be vexatious or oppressive and where the balance of convenience favours the grant of relief

A court exercising federal jurisdiction may grant an anti-suit injunction to restrain foreign proceedings only where the continuation of those proceedings would be vexatious or oppressive and where the balance of convenience favours the grant of relief.

Cullis v Ahern at [37]

Ratio Decidendi

Judges

Quick Take

Headnote

Legal Areas

Linked Principles

Case Details

Built by Barristers,For Australian Law.

Judgment

Subsequent Judicial Consideration5›

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.