Responsible government in the Dominions: Responsible government in the Dominions

Responsible government in the Dominions (Vol. 1)

Bibliographic data

Multivolume work

Identifikator:: 1896933912

Document type:: Multivolume work

Author:: Keith, Arthur Berriedale http://d-nb.info/gnd/119086794

Title:: Responsible government in the Dominions

Place of publication:: Oxford

Publisher:: Clarendon Press

Year of publication:: 1912-

Collection:: Economics Books

Usage license:: Get license information via the feedback formular.

Volume

Identifikator:: 1896934455

URN:: urn:nbn:de:zbw-retromon-236504

Document type:: Volume

Author:: Keith, Arthur Berriedale http://d-nb.info/gnd/119086794

Title:: Responsible government in the Dominions

Volume count:: Vol. 1

Place of publication:: Oxford

Publisher:: Clarendon Pr.

Year of publication:: 1912

Scope:: LI, 568 Seiten

Digitisation:: 2022

Collection:: Economics Books

Usage license:: Get license information via the feedback formular.

Chapter

Document type:: Multivolume work

Structure type:: Chapter

Title:: Part II. The executive Government

Collection:: Economics Books

142 THE EXECUTIVE GOVERNMENT [PART II contracts are entered into not on the faith of the agent but on the public faith, and it has been decided in Haldimand’s case! that the Governor is one of those servants against whom it is impossible to succeed in any action on a Govern- ment contract. Nor has the Governor the power of granting a flat to a petition of right, as has the Sovereign in this country. It is to be presumed that it is considered that the prerogative is needless for the safe government of the country, and this is probably the case. But the result is very incon- venient, and has caused some feeling of friction between the Imperial and the Colonial Governments, especially that of Western Australia. For as the Governor cannot grant a fiat, if a petition of right is presented it must be sent home for submission to the Secretary of State, who takes the advice of the law officers of the Crown, and in accordance with their advice, which is given wholly as a matter of law in accordance with the invariable practice in this country to grant a fiat if a colourable case of contract or the withholding of property is disclosed, the petition is or is not submitted to the King with the advice to issue the fiat : if the fiat is issued the writ is endorsed ‘ Let Right be done in the Supreme Court of the Colony of ———’, and the petition so endorsed is returned to the petitioner, who proceeds then with his action in the Courts. It was naturally contended at the Colonial Conference of 1897 by the Premiers then present, that in such a case the advice of the local Government should govern the question of the grant or the refusal of a fiat.2 It was suggested that, granting the appropriateness of the granting of a fiat being submitted to the Sovereign, yet it was a derogation from the principles of responsible government that a fiat should be granted on any advice other than that of the responsible * Macbeath v. Haldimand, 1'T. R. 172. Palmer v. Hutchinson, 6 App. Cas. 619; Dunn v. Macdonald, [1897] 1 Q. B. 555. In cases of tort no fiat can be granted, as there is no liability of the Crown; a doctrine followed in Canada, see KR. v. Macfarlane, 78. C. R. 216; R.v. Mackay, 88S. C. R. 1. ' Cf. Harrison Moore, Commonwealth of Australia,’ p. 165. There was a New South Wales case in 1863, a South Australia case in 1894, and a series in Western Australia from 1897 to 1909,

Access restriction

Copyright

fullscreen: Responsible government in the Dominions (Vol. 1)

Multivolume work

Volume

Chapter

Table of contents

Download

Volume

Chapter

This page

Image fragment

Citation links

Citation recommendation