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

cap. 11] THE COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA 881 result, but merely to enable the taking of appeals to the High Court instead of taking them to the Privy Council. More- over, in addition to placing the High Court in a somewhat undignified position, it has taken away much of the work of the Supreme Courts, and has also deprived the High Court of the advantage of the reasoned considerations of the Supreme Courts on which to found its judgements. Nor san it be doubted that the Judicial Committee will be less reluctant to upset a judgement which has nothing more solid behind it than very possibly the much diverging views of a single judge of a Supreme Court and the Justices of the High Court. In the course of the judgement in that case the High Court had occasion, as part of the grounds of decision, to hold that the term in (ii) ¢ from which at the establish- ment of the Commonwealth an appeal lies to the Queen in Council ? does not mean that an appeal must have lain of right. This conclusion was indeed inevitable, because there existed a final Court of Appeal in South Australia created by a local Act of 1837 (7 Will. IV. No. 5), and strengthened in 1861 (24 & 25 Vict. No. 5), which is still the ultimate Court of Appeal in the state, though it is no longer used, its continuance having been due to the fact that the then Chief Justice Boothby * was excessively unpopular from his declaring a large number of Colonial laws invalid. But the result is very inconvenient, for thus every Court can claim, as the Judiciary Act now stands, that appeals can go direct to the High Court from it, since it is absolutely certain that an appeal lay by special leave from any Court in the dominions to the Crown in Council. In the Kamarooka Gold- Mining Co. v. Kerr 2 there was an attempt made to go direct to the High Court from the Court of Mines in Victoria, but the High Court refused, saying that in the case in question 1 Cf. Parl. Pap., August 1862. See the Acts 7 Will. IV. No. 5; No. 31 of 1855-6, s. 14; and 24 & 25 Vict. No. 5. 2 (1908) 6 C. L. R. 255. Contrast Quick and Garran, op. cit., p. 739. For a similar court (the Governor in Council with the Chief Justice) as the only appeal court on divorce in Western Australia, see 27 Vict. No. 19; Thompson v. Thompson and Hutchins, 11 W. A, L. R, 137. 12792

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