(c) That's not right. Section 109 of the federal constitution provides that Commonwealth law prevails over state law, provided that the Commonwealth law is validly enacted, but only to the extent that the state law is inconsistent with the Commonwealth law. This rule applies regardless of whether the Commonwealth or state legislation was enacted first. In effect, the rule means that if the conflicting sections in the state legislation can be excised or ‘severed’ without unduly affecting the remaining sections of the Act, then the remainder of the Act continues to be valid. But if excising the conflicting sections radically affects the remaining provisions, the entire Act will be invalidated.
The following summary of a decision by the High Court of Australia illustrates the application of s 109.
As regards conflicting territory legislation, the Commonwealth constitution gives the Commonwealth government the power to override any territory legislation by enacting contrary legislation.
In practice, this means that, in relation to a shared legislative power, state and territory parliaments are careful not to enact legislation that conflicts with existing federal legislation, or in relation to which the federal government clearly has a different policy. This helps maintain a uniformity of laws throughout Australia.
Note: Law enacted by a local government is invalid to the extent that it is inconsistent with Commonwealth law or the law of the relevant state.