VIC Constitution - Commonwealth Law state law clash (109)

[Danman132]

If a state law is inconsistent with a Commonwealth law and the Commonwealth law is clearly something the Cth can legislate under S51 of the Australian Constitution, according to S109 of the Constitution the Commonwealth law prevails and the state law becomes invalid to the extent of the inconsistency.

If someone is affected by an invalid state law, do they really have to put their life savings on the line to take this to the Supreme Court to invalidate or protect themselves from the state law?

Can't someone just show the enforcing party of the state that the law they're using is invalid and therefore can't be enforced?

I'm just not sure how a state can just make up any law that is inconsistent with the Constitution and force citizens into a position where they have to challenge that law in the Supreme Court?
What are a citizens rights here?

 

[Docupedia]

Go to the Federal body that oversees it, and point out the apparent inconsistency. If they’re not interested/unwilling to do anything, that will generally tell you how the Commonwealth feels about the matter.