Federated Engine Drivers' and Firemen's Association of Australasia Claimants; and Colonial Sugar Refining Company Limited [1916] HCA 55

OF AUSTRALIA. 103

{HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA.

es: 'MEN'S ASSOCIATION OF AUS- CLAIMANTS ; _ TRALASIA bal | Se Sipe tb

AND

| COLONIAL SUGAR REFINING COM-

ANY LIMITED AND OTHERS. . } ROMER:

tional Law—Power of Commonwealth Parliament—Validity of legislation— yy. op a. Court—Exception from appellate jurisdiction—Jurisdiction conferred on org, one Sustice—Chambers—Prohibition—The Constitution (63 & 64 Viet. c. 12), "es 51, 73, 75, 76, 79—Commonwealth Conciliation and Arbitration Act 1904- \erpourne, 15 (No. 13 of 1904—No. 35 of 1915), sec. 2a. Sept. 5, 6, 20.

The whole of see. 2144 of the Commonwealth Conciliation and Arbitration grimth 0.1. ct 1904-1915 is a valid exercise of the legislative power of the Parliament Pays mac

sees the Commonwealth. Gavan Duffy, Powers and

Rich JJ.

and Barton J. dissenting).

Held, also by Isaacs, Higgins, Gavan Duffy, Powers and Rich JJ., that the provision in sub-sec. 4 of sec. 2144 that the decision of the Justice is not to be subject to any appeal to the High Court in its appellate jurisdiction is an Ui exception from that jurisdiction within the meaning of sec. 73 of the Consti-

By Isaacs, Gavan Duffy and Rich JJ.—Sub-sce. 4 of see. 2144 only applies to a decision of a Justice sitting in Chambers.

ection would be valid; and it is the duty of the Justice before whom the ion comes to proceed with the inquiry in pursuance of the words of , eee and to leave the effect of his decision for oe in which the

104 HIGH COURT (191

H.C. or A. RerereNce. i A plaint having been instituted in the Commonwealth Court o' » Conciliation and Arbitration in which the Federated Engine Drivers' and Firemen's Association of Australasia were claimants and th

1916.

Finexen's Colonial Sugar Refining Co. Ltd. and a large number of other com- IREMEN'S z

Association panies, corporations, firms and individuals were respondents, the or Ausrran-