Responsible government in the Dominions: Responsible government in the Dominions

Responsible government in the Dominions (Vol. 1)

Bibliographic data

Multivolume work

Identifikator:: 1896933912

Document type:: Multivolume work

Author:: Keith, Arthur Berriedale http://d-nb.info/gnd/119086794

Title:: Responsible government in the Dominions

Place of publication:: Oxford

Publisher:: Clarendon Press

Year of publication:: 1912-

Collection:: Economics Books

Usage license:: Get license information via the feedback formular.

Volume

Identifikator:: 1896934455

URN:: urn:nbn:de:zbw-retromon-236504

Document type:: Volume

Author:: Keith, Arthur Berriedale http://d-nb.info/gnd/119086794

Title:: Responsible government in the Dominions

Volume count:: Vol. 1

Place of publication:: Oxford

Publisher:: Clarendon Pr.

Year of publication:: 1912

Scope:: LI, 568 Seiten

Digitisation:: 2022

Collection:: Economics Books

Usage license:: Get license information via the feedback formular.

Chapter

Document type:: Multivolume work

Structure type:: Chapter

Title:: Part III. The Parliaments of the Dominions

Collection:: Economics Books

CHAP. II] LIMITATION OF LEGISLATION 381 absence of the defendant, or where the cause of action has nothing to do with the Colony. To put an extreme case, if a Colony should allow cases to be brought in its Courts against persons in England in respect of causes of action arising in England under English law, the judgements of the Courts would be probably invalid in any other Court of the world by private international law, but they would not be invalid on the more restricted ground that a Colony cannot legislate for more than its territorial limits. But if it subjects persons resident in England to actions in its Courts for matters affecting the Colony, as, for instance, a contract to be performed therein, it certainly does not exceed the boundaries of its valid jurisdic- tion, though the amount of consideration to be paid to its judgements will depend on private international law. The principle can be illustrated by two recent cases. In one! the High Court of the Commonwealth decided that an Act taxing property would not be read to apply to property situated in England, but insisted that the right was beyond doubt to tax property, the proceeds of which were either actually present in Queensland or were under contract to be present there, so that they must be regarded as being in Queensland. In another case? the Privy Council held that the express limitation of the wording of s. 92 of the British North America Act, 1867, was such as to forbid any Provincial Legislature to levy death duties on any property whatever not within the province de facto, even if the deceased had died domiciled there, although it is the general rule that a Colonial Legislature can impose death duties on property outside when a man is domiciled in a place, on the ground that in law the assets are where the man is domiciled, though this does not apply to landed property, which cannot be taxed if outside the Colony, unless under contract to be 1 Hughes v. Munro, 9 C. L. R. 289. Cf. on the seus of assets, debts, &e., Beaver v. Master in Equity of Supreme Court of Victoria, [1895] A. C. 251; Harding v. Commissioners of Stamps for Queenstand, [1898] A. C. 769; Stamp Duties Commissioner v. Salting, [1907] A. C. 449. * Woodruff v. Attorney-General for Ontario, [1908] A. C. 508. . Cf: Lovitt v. R.. 438. C. R. 106 and in the Privy Council.

Access restriction

Copyright

fullscreen: Responsible government in the Dominions (Vol. 1)

Multivolume work

Volume

Chapter

Table of contents

Download

Volume

Chapter

This page

Image fragment

Citation links

Citation recommendation