High Court of Australia
Not Fol Shipping Co sions Sips Ene (hs fc fey TOPALR 409 aa Ea. Oe 420 oi COURT
{HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA.) JOHN SHARP & SONS LTD. . . . . Puainmirr;
AGAINST
THE SHIP KATHERINE MACKALL . . Derenpant.
H.C. or A, High Court—Jurisdiction—* Admiralty and maritime jurisdiction *°—Commonwealth
1924. a British possession—Action in rem on contract of affreightment—Bill reserved for ww royal assent—Colonial Courts of Admiralty Act 1890 (53 & 54 Vict. c. 27), secs. Metsournr, — 2, 3, 4, 15—Interpretation Act 1889 (52 & 53 Viet. c. 63), sec. 18—Admiralty May 27, 28. Court Act 1861 (24 Vict. c. 10), sec. 6—The Constitution (63 & 64 Viel. c.
12), secs. 51, 58, 6 6 (111.), 98—Judiciary Act 1903-1920 (No. 6 of 1903—No.
Beuser 38 of 1920), secs. 30, 30A. Aug.
Held, that the Commonwealth of Australia is, by virtue of see. 18 (2) of the Knox C., Interpretation Act 1889, a " British possession" within the meaning of sec. 2 avan Dui of the Colonial Courts of Admiralty Act 1890, and, therefore, that the High Court, Starke 3 having within the Commonwealth unlimited civil jurisdiction, is a Colonial
Court of Admiralty and has jurisdiction in an action by consignees against a ship, the owner of which is not domiciled in Australia, for delivery in a damaged condition of goods for which the consignees hold a bill of Jading issued by the
master of the ship.
Quore, whether jurisdiction in such an action is not also validly conferred upon the High Court by secs. 30 and 30a of the Judiciary Act 1903-1920.
Per Isaacs J.: Sec. 30 of the Judiciary Act 1903-1920 has no force because- having been reserved for the King's assent, sec. 60 of the Constitution was
not complied with.
DeMURRER. An action was brought in the High Court by John Sharp & Sons
Ltd., a company incorporated in Victoria, against the Ship Katherine Mackall, of which no owner or part owner was domiciled in Australia. By the statement of claim it was alleged that about 5th July 1923 certain timber was shipped on board the Katherine Mackall at the port of Portland, Oregon, in the United States of America, by
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