Vanderstock v Victoria

COURT OR TRIBUNAL

High Court of Australia

DATE FILED (OR FIRST HEARING DATE)

16/09/2021

LITIGATION TYPE

Constitutional and Human Rights / State Accountability

SUBJECT MATTER

Constitutional rights

REVIEW TYPE

N/A

SUMMARY

Christopher Vanderstock and Kathleen Davies are challenging the constitutional validity of the Zero and Low Emission Vehicle Distance-based Charge Act 2021 (Vic) (ZLEV Act) in the High Court of Australia. As background to the case, from 1 July 2021, the claimants and other Victorian electric vehicle drivers were required by the ZLEV Act to maintain a log of the use of their vehicles and pay an annual charge to the Victorian Government based on the number of kilometres driven in the preceding 12 months. The claimants argue that Victoria lacks the constitutional authority to impose such a charge based on s 90 of the Constitution, which the claimants argue reserves the exclusive power to levy such charges for the Commonwealth.The case was heard by a full bench of the High Court in Canberra on 14, 15 and 16 February 2023.

The High Court of Australia (HCA) found that the (VIC) Zero and Low Emission Vehicle Distance-based Charge Act 2021 s 7(1) was invalid on the basis that it imposed duty of excise within the meaning of (CTH) Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act s 90. The HCA found that the power of the Commonwealth Parliament ‘to impose duties of customs and of excise’ was ‘exclusive’ of the powers of the States and self-governing Territories.

CASE DOCUMENTS

M61/2021 Vanderstock v Victoria Case
High Court hearing 14-16 February 2023
Vanderstock v Victoria [2023] HCA 30