Attorney-General for State of SA v Holmes & Ors

The High Court of Australia considered an appeal by the Attorney-General for the State of South Australia against a decision of the Full Court of the Supreme Court of South Australia concerning the validity of certain regulations made under the *Land Value Assessment Act 1936* (SA). The dispute centred on whether these regulations, which purported to prescribe a method for valuing land for the purposes of the Act, were *ultra vires* the powers conferred by the legislation.

The primary legal issue before the High Court was whether the regulations validly exercised the delegated legislative power granted by section 39(1) of the *Land Value Assessment Act 1936* (SA). Specifically, the Court had to determine if the regulations, by prescribing a specific method of valuation, unduly fettered the discretion of the Valuer-General, thereby exceeding the scope of the statutory authority.

The High Court held that the regulations were *ultra vires* and invalid. Their Honours reasoned that section 39(1) of the Act conferred a broad discretion upon the Valuer-General to prescribe methods of valuation, but this discretion was intended to allow for flexibility and adaptation to varying circumstances. The regulations, by mandating a single, rigid method of valuation, effectively removed this discretion and imposed a constraint not contemplated by the enabling statute. The Court applied the principle that delegated legislation must not be inconsistent with the purpose and terms of the empowering Act, and that regulations cannot be used to fetter a discretion that the legislature intended to be exercised.

The appeal was dismissed, and the Full Court's declaration that the regulations were invalid was affirmed.