Responsible government in the Dominions: Responsible government in the Dominions

Responsible government in the Dominions (Vol. 3)

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:: 1896935311

URN:: urn:nbn:de:zbw-retromon-237672

Document type:: Volume

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

Title:: Responsible government in the Dominions

Volume count:: Vol. 3

Place of publication:: Oxford

Publisher:: Clarendon Pr.

Year of publication:: 1912

Scope:: XII Seiten, Seiten 1102-1670

Digitisation:: 2022

Collection:: Economics Books

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

Chapter

Document type:: Multivolume work

Structure type:: Chapter

Title:: Part VI. The judiciary

Collection:: Economics Books

1372 THE JUDICIARY [PART VI the Privy Council. The plan adopted, therefore, is to debar the Supreme Courts from ever pronouncing a decision on any guestion in which the rights of the Commonwealth and of the states, or of the states inter se, are at issue, and thus every such case falls to be decided by the High Court, which by refusing a certificate for an appeal could make itself the final arbiter. That the law is inira vires the Commonwealth Parliament appears perfectly clear, and it may be said to be not only a sensible and satisfactory solution of a difficulty, which brought both the High Court and the Privy Council into some degree of contempt, but to be in keeping with the spirit of the Constitution, which was intended to reserve to the High Court such constitutional cases. It is, however, true that a certain amount of confusion is still possible. In the first place, the Privy Council is not compelled to require that every case shall go to a Supreme Court before an appeal can be allowed, and it is still open to the Privy Council to give special leave for appeals from any Court in a state inferior to the Supreme Court in the exercise of federal jurisdiction. The risk of this being done is, how- ever, so small that it was deliberately passed over in the new federal Act.! Secondly, it is still open to the Privy Council to grant special leave of appeal even from the High Court with regard to the question whether the matter at issue is really one involving the question of the limits infer se of the powers of the Commonwealth and of a state or of the states. That this should be so is obviously necessary, as the High Court cannot claim by law to decide when such a question does arise, and it has been so decided in the case of the Attorney- General for New South Wales v. Collector of Customs.? In 1909 Ontario proposed to limit appeals to the Supreme Court and the Privy Council alike. In the latter case all appeals of right were to disappear, and appeals by special leave to be restricted to constitutional cases, cases involving 1 Commonwealth Parliamentary Debates, 1907, p. 3758. 111909] A. C. 345. (The report is misleading—the refusal was because the case fell under s. 74 of the Constitution Act, not although.) The High Court has had to decide what cases fall within this category; see p. 884.

Access restriction

Copyright

fullscreen: Responsible government in the Dominions (Vol. 3)

Multivolume work

Volume

Chapter

Table of contents

Download

Volume

Chapter

This page

Image fragment

Citation links

Citation recommendation