Nix v. Hedden the respondent and found that the tomato should be classified under the customs regulations as a vegetable, based on the ways in which it is used, and the popular perception to this end. Justice Horace Gray, writing the opinion for the Court, stated that: Justice Gray, citing several Supreme Court cases ("Brown v. Piper," 91 U.S. 37, 42, and "Jones v. U.S.," 137 U.S. 202, 216) stated that when words have acquired no special meaning in trade or commerce, the ordinary meaning must be used by the court. In this case dictionaries cannot be admitted as evidence, but only as
Pape v Commissioner of Taxation Pape v Commissioner of Taxation Pape v Commissioner of Taxation is an Australian court case concerning the constitutional validity of the "Tax Bonus for Working Australians Act (No 2) 2009" (Cth) which seeks to give one-off payments of up to $900 to Australian taxpayers. The decision of the High Court of Australia was announced on 3 April 2009, with reasons to follow later. The plaintiff in the case, Bryan Pape, was a law lecturer and barrister who represented himself before the Court. He challenged the legislation on the ground that the payments, said to be a tax bonus, were actually