High Court of Australia
IN THE HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA
THE PUBLIC SSRVICH BOARD OF THE Bx parte Ward, Prosecutor.
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
Judgment delivered at.
HB, Daw, Gor. Print, Melb
0,12280/45
Ve
THE PUBLIC SERVICE BOARD OF
THE STaTe OF VICTORIA
EX PaRTE
ORD)
Order nisi discharged.
YARD .
No order as to costs.
THE KING
ve
HE _ PUBLIC SERVICE eo OF THE ius OF VICTORIA ARTE DON.
FARD .
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT. LATHAM C.J.
> THE KING
ve THE PUBLIC. VICE BOARD OF TATE OF VICTOR: EX PARTE DONA . REASONS FOR JUDGMENT. LATHAM C
The prosecutor Donald Herbert Ward obtained in the Supreme Court of Victoria an order nisi for a writ of mandamis directed to the Public Service Board of the State of Victoria commanding the Board to hear and determine an appeal by Ward against the non-recommendation of him by the Secretary to the Law Department for appointment to a position as Clerk of Courts and to appoint Ward to one of certain positions advertised. The ground of the application was that Ward was entitled to the appointment as against the other applicants by reason of the Victorian Dischargal Servicemen's Preference Act 1943. He claimed that his rights were unaffected by the Commonwealth Re-establish- ment and Employment Act 1945. The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court directed that the case be argued before a Full Court of the High Court - Judiciary Act 1903-47, sec. 18.
Ward is a Victorian public servant in the Courts Branch of the Law Department. He is a "discharged serviceman" within the meaning of the Victorian Act and is also a "member of the forces" and a "person entitled to preference" within the meaning of the Commonwealth Act. He was an applicant for one of six positions which were vacant for clerks of courts. He is qualified for the position which he seeks, The Public Service Board has, however, appointed, or proposes to appoint, other applicants for promotion on the ground that if Ward were promoted he would gain seniority over other dischamed members of the forces who, under the Commonwealth Act, sec. 16, were or are entitled to be re- instated in their employment under conditions not less favourable to them than those which would havé been applicable to them if they had remained in the employment of the State instead of leaving
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