❓ Mr Trenorden questions the Premier regarding the costs associated with the Betfair High Court challenge to WA's betting legislation, specifically concerning potential restrictions on interstate trade and the financial burden on the state and racing industry. The Premier's response details the legal defense, absence of damages, and funding source.
AnsweredQoN 3303Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
(a) unfairly, inequitably and unjustly restrain ‘Free Trade’ between the States of the Commonwealth of Australia;
(b) imposes unconstitutional and therefore illegal protectionist principles; and
(c) illegally impinges on the inalienable rights of the public of Western Australia to access interstate goods and services?
(2) Will the Premier advise what will be the actual total cost incurred regarding:
(a) legal costs incurred by the State, including damages awarded to the plaintiff;
(b) any other related costs including, but not limited to, those involved in rewriting, resubmitting and passing through both Houses of Parliament the
Racing and Wagering Legislation Amendment Bill 2006
?
(3) Will the bare the Department of Treasury and Finance or the Western Australian racing industry, in-part or as a whole bear the financial brunt of this issue?
(b) imposes unconstitutional and therefore illegal protectionist principles; and
(c) illegally impinges on the inalienable rights of the public of Western Australia to access interstate goods and services?
(2) Will the Premier advise what will be the actual total cost incurred regarding:
(a) legal costs incurred by the State, including damages awarded to the plaintiff;
(b) any other related costs including, but not limited to, those involved in rewriting, resubmitting and passing through both Houses of Parliament the
Racing and Wagering Legislation Amendment Bill 2006
?
(3) Will the bare the Department of Treasury and Finance or the Western Australian racing industry, in-part or as a whole bear the financial brunt of this issue?
AnswerView source ↗
Answered
1 May 2008
Responded by
Minister for Racing and Gaming
Response time
28 days
(1) The challenge by Betfair Pty Ltd was to the validity of sections 24(1aa) and 27D of the Betting Control Act 1954. These provisions were inserted by the Betting and Racing Legislation Amendment Act 2006, with the Second Reading Speech setting out the objective of the amendments.
In defending the High Court challenge by Betfair Pty Ltd to the validity of the legislation enacted by the Parliament, the State sought to defend the integrity and viability of the local racing industry and relied on legal advice that supported the State's position. The grounds on which the State defended the action were set out in its written submissions filed in the High Court.
(2) No damages were awarded to the Plaintiff. While the Plaintiff's legal costs will be met by the State, no claim has yet been lodged and as such the amount is not yet known. The State's legal defence was conducted by employed legal officers with no use of external legal consultants. As such, the principal outgoings will be the Plaintiff's legal costs.
The costs of passing legislation are not separately accounted for.
(3) The costs of the litigation will be met out of the Consolidated Fund.
Notice: This document is created or edited using unregistered or evaluation copy of rtLib valid for testing or development purposes only. To use it for productive or any other purposes please register it. You may purchase the license on
http://www.rtlib.com
In defending the High Court challenge by Betfair Pty Ltd to the validity of the legislation enacted by the Parliament, the State sought to defend the integrity and viability of the local racing industry and relied on legal advice that supported the State's position. The grounds on which the State defended the action were set out in its written submissions filed in the High Court.
(2) No damages were awarded to the Plaintiff. While the Plaintiff's legal costs will be met by the State, no claim has yet been lodged and as such the amount is not yet known. The State's legal defence was conducted by employed legal officers with no use of external legal consultants. As such, the principal outgoings will be the Plaintiff's legal costs.
The costs of passing legislation are not separately accounted for.
(3) The costs of the litigation will be met out of the Consolidated Fund.
Notice: This document is created or edited using unregistered or evaluation copy of rtLib valid for testing or development purposes only. To use it for productive or any other purposes please register it. You may purchase the license on
http://www.rtlib.com
Explore WA Government Data
Search the full archive in the free dashboard, or query programmatically via API.
Explore more
Government Gazette
Appointments, regulatory notices, planning changes.
Hansard
Debates, questions, speeches and sentiment.
Tabled Papers
Reports and documents tabled in Parliament.
Committees
Committee profiles and recent reports.
Regulations
Subsidiary legislation with filters and summaries.
Bills
Proposed laws and parliamentary progress.
Acts
Current WA legislation and summaries.
Explanatory Memoranda
Bills with EMs (text/PDF) available.
Members
MP profiles, party breakdown and rankings.
Pollie Rankings
Data-driven rankings across 19 categories.
Amendment Chains
Track how schemes and regulations evolve over time.