Wednesday, February 27, 2013

KING v. JONES ; McEWEN v. HACKERT ; JONES v. JONES. (1972) 128 CLR 221

Barwick C.J.(1), McTiernan(2), Menzies(3), Walsh(4), Gibbs(5) and Stephen(6)JJ.
Barwick C.J.(1)10. There are some basic propositions of constitutional construction which are beyond controversy. The words of the Constitution are to be read in that natural sense they bore in the circumstances of their enactment by the Imperial Parliament in 1900. That meaning remains, beyond the reach of any Australian Parliament, subject only to alteration by the means provided bys.128 of the Constitution. The connotation of words employed in the Constitution does not change though changing events and attitudes may in some circumstances extend the denotation or reach of those words. These propositions are fully documented in the reported decisions of this Court which has the task of finally and authoritatively deciding both the connotation and the denotation of the language of the Constitution. (at p229)

No comments:

Post a Comment