High Court of Australia
©.12280/45
HB Dew, Gor, Print, Melb
IN THE HIGH COURT OF AUSTKALIA
Edward McCamley & Sons Pty.Ltd.
QRAL REASONS.
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
Judgment delivered at__ Sydney... on__Tuesday, 26th November, 194!
ee
JUDGMENT.
LATHAM, C.J.
This is an appeal from a decision of a Magistrate convicting the appellant for an offence against the National Security Act in that contrary to Regulation 14 (2) of the National Security (Boot Trades) Dilution Regulations, the appellant, being an employer, did fail
to pay a Boot Trades apprentice serving him in the fifth year
of his service not less than the wage namely £6. 6. 6. specified for a tradesman for a week.
These regulations relate to the dilution of employment in the boot trade, that is, to the introduction into the trade of persons to work therein who are not, in the words of the regulations, recognised tradesmen. These persons are described as added tradesmen.
In my opinion, under the Defence Power of the Commonwealth Parliament, there is federal power to legislate for dilution of labour in industry, and for the rates of wages to be paid in industry to which schemes of dilution are made applicable. Accordingly, there is, in my opinion, under the defence power, power to provide for the wages to be paid to apprentices under ~° a dilution scheme in the boot industry.
The regulation, as it originally stood, was in this form - "Upon employing an added tradesman an employer shell pay to any boot trade apprentice serving him in the fifth or later year of service not less than the wage so prescribed (i.e. by an appropriate industriel award etc. ) for a tradesman". The words "upon employing an added tradesman", were removed from the regulations by Statutory Rule 76 of 1945. In my opinion it is immaterial that this amendment was maie; there was power to fix by federal legislation under the defence power in a dilution scheme the wages to be paid to apprentices. In my opinion these conclusions follow from the decisions of the Court in the Australian Woollen Mills Case and in the McKay and Massey Harris cases. They would
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate