Ss BLO! y, BUZACQTT AND. TD. JUDGHENT BOX Cod, GAVAN DUFFY¢S. & STAKE Jo The defendant (tha reapondent to thia appeal) sae charged on two informations, one that 16 com-Atied « oak out, aid the other that if obntinued to Louk outs contrary to the provisione of the Com.onweaith Congiliation and Arbitration Aot 1904 = 1920 5S. GA. The complainant (the appellant) led evidence on the hearing of these in- formations for the purpose of shewing that the defandant closed ite place o€ WaskHese, or part of "Ate place, of amployment, or, that employ- era acting in combination refused unreasonably to give work, or, that the defeniant tetally or partly suepended work with a view to compol * its amployees to accept a tex or comiition of amploynent in the way of losser Wages and longer howra of work. On the other hasd, the defendant led avidence for thospuaye purpose of shewing that tho closing of its place of melnesa and ita rofunal to give and suspension of work, wore in truth due to ite adm to reduce the costa of produation and save sexe ite bueinéss from the ruin whioh threagened it, 4f 4% were to have oontimed manufacturing on the conditions aa to wages and howre preaoribed by an award of the Common— woalth Gourff/ of Conalliation and Arbitration. The Magistrate who heard the informatione accepted tiw evi- denge of. the defendant, and wo are not in as good a position aa he wa to determing the oradibility of the witnesa for the defence. There: a hee Ta OB, we rust accept i, bhatovaiklende, and upon that evidenoe there ought not to ba a vonviation. Conse-mently the aprewl is dismissed with costa. Rota. In the obsence of the original reasona for judgsent in ths abeve oase the reagons stated above are considsred by His Honour the Chief Juatioe to be the aame as those delivered on 24th April,1922, e2:1Li2a3 Associate to the Chief Justica, IFQ2