it was possible to obey both sets of laws simultaneously, by acquiring both State and Commonwealth licenses. However, it was his opinion that the regulations expressed an intention to "completely and exhaustively" cover the field with regards to the regulation of such premises; he found the detailed regulations compelling in this regard. Furthermore, the State law would have acted to deny the rights granted by a certificate obtained under the Commonwealth regulations. The court was split 3-3. As this was a stated case and not an appeal, the decision of the Chief Justice prevailed, in what is sometimes described as a statutory majority. Appeal In June 1955 the Privy Council gave special leave to appeal except in relation to the constitutional powers of the Commonwealth and the States. The High Court subsequently refused to issue a certificate under section 74 of the Constitution. The Privy Council held that the question of whether laws were inconsistent involved the application of section 109 of the Constitution and did not involve a question in relation to the constitutional powers of the Commonwealth and the States. The Privy Council approved the decision of the statutory majority, particularly the judgment of Fullagar J and dismissed the appeal. See also Section 51(i) of the Australian Constitution Section 109 of the Australian Constitution Australian constitutional law References Winterton, G. et al. Australian federal constitutional law: commentary and materials, 1999. LBC Information Services, Sydney. High Court of Australia cases 1954 in Australian law Australian constitutional law Trade and commerce power in the Australian Constitution cases Inconsistency in the Australian Constitution cases 1954 in case law History of agriculture in Australia Meat industry