Responsible government in the Dominions: Responsible government in the Dominions

Responsible government in the Dominions (Vol. 2)

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:: 1896935052

URN:: urn:nbn:de:zbw-retromon-238139

Document type:: Volume

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

Title:: Responsible government in the Dominions

Volume count:: Vol. 2

Place of publication:: Oxford

Publisher:: Clarendon Pr.

Year of publication:: 1912

Scope:: XI Seiten, Seiten 570-1100

Digitisation:: 2022

Collection:: Economics Books

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

Chapter

Document type:: Multivolume work

Structure type:: Chapter

Title:: Part IV. The federations and the union // Chapter II. The commonwealth of Australia

Collection:: Economics Books

CHAP. 11] THE COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA 859 the express words of s. 76 of the Constitution, which autho- rized Parliament to confer jurisdiction on the High Court in any matter arising under or involving the interpretation of the Constitution or arising under any law made by Parlia- ment, and s. 83 of the J udiciary Act, 1903, which authorized the Court to make orders or direct the issue of writs requiring any Court to abstain from the exercise of any federal juris- diction which it did not possess. Barton J. concurred in the view of the Chief Justice on this point. O’Connor J. held that s. 71 of the Constitution,? which declares that the judicial power of the Commonwealth shall be vested in the High Court of Australia, was sufficient to confer upon the High Court the power to keep inferior Courts of the Federal judicial system from exceeding their jurisdiction. It was also given by s. 75 (v) which clearly applied to judicial as well as to non-judicial officers. More- over, 8. 76 of the Constitution and s. 33 (b) of the J udiciary det gave the power, even had it not been given by the other sections of the Constitution. On the other hand, Isaacs J.3 held that s. 75 (v) did not confer the power in question. Prohibition to another Court Was not original but appellate jurisdiction. The power given ins. 33 Ab) of the Judiciary Act must be exercised within the range of the original jurisdiction conferred, to which it was expressly restrained, but he held that s. 31 of the Conciliation and Arbitration Act, 1904, did not cover the entire field of appellate jurisdiction as used in s. 73 of the Constitution. The expression appealed from in that section was used in the sense of the correction of error in the course of adjudica- tion, and not as including a denial of jurisdiction to adjudicate. When the Legislature intended to take away entirely the Power of the superior Courts to keep subordinate tribunals within the limits assigned, clear words were invariably used, 38 in s. 52 of the New South Wales Industrial Disputes Act, 19084 No such provision had been made in this case, and ‘11 C. LR. 1, at p. 33. * 11 C. L. R. 1, at pp. 40-2. "11 C. L. R. 1, at pp. 47-9. Baater v. New South Wales Clickers’ Association, 10 C. L. R. 114,

Access restriction

Copyright

fullscreen: Responsible government in the Dominions (Vol. 2)

Multivolume work

Volume

Chapter

Table of contents

Download

Volume

Chapter

This page

Image fragment

Citation links

Citation recommendation