Capital Duplicators Pty Ltd & Anor v Australian Capital Territory and Anor

In the High Court of Australia, Capital Duplicators Pty Ltd and Luhaze ACT Pty Ltd (the applicants) sought to reopen earlier decisions of the Court concerning the ambit of the prohibition on the imposition of duties of excise under section 90 of the Constitution. The respondents were the Australian Capital Territory and another party. The proceedings involved submissions on the appropriateness of reopening these constitutional decisions and the potential impact of an amending Act.

The central legal issue before the Court was the constitutional question of the scope of the prohibition in section 90 of the Constitution, which dictates the extent to which States and self-governing territories are excluded from imposing taxes on goods. This prohibition has significant implications for state revenue, necessitating substantial Commonwealth grants, and has been the subject of numerous High Court decisions. The applicants sought to argue for a reconsideration of these established interpretations.

The submissions focused on the effect of section 90 and the Court's prior case law. Counsel for the applicants referred to the report of an advisory committee to the Constitutional Commission, which had considered whether states should have the power to impose duties of excise. The committee's report discussed the impact of section 90 and the High Court's decisions in relation to it, indicating that the applicants intended to rely on these materials to support their arguments for reopening the previous decisions.