car. i] THE COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA 847 
important questions as regards the power of the Court were 
decided in that case, which are summed up in the headnote 
to the case as follows — 
Assuming the existence of all other circumstances which 
constitute an industrial dispute extending beyond the limits 
of one state, including a demand by combined and organized 
employés on their employers, want of preconcert on the part 
of the employers in refusing the demand does not either 
under s. 51 (xxxv) of the constitution or under the Common- 
wealth Conciliation and Arbitration Act, 1904, deprive the 
Commonwealth Court of Conciliation and Arbitration of 
jurisdiction to make an award on a plaint brought before the 
Court by the organization of employés. 
So held by O’Connor, Isaacs, and Higgins JJ. 
By Griffith C.J. :— 
The absence of such preconcert may be evidence to 
negative the existence of a dispute within the meaning of 
8. 81 (xxxv) of the constitution, but, on the assumption 
mentioned, the mere want of such preconcert on the part of 
the employers does not, under the Commonwealth Concilia- 
Yon and Arbitration Act, 1904, deprive the Commonwealth 
Court of such jurisdiction. 
Where part of the demand made by an organization of 
employés is that the wages in one state shall be higher than 
those Ain the other states, the Commonwealth Court of 
Conciliation and Arbitration may, nevertheless, make an 
enforceable award in respect of the employés in that state. 
If an industry has several different and well-recognized 
branches, the Commonwealth Court of Conciliation and 
Arbitration may make an award enforceable in all the states 
0 which the particular dispute extends, as to wages and 
conditions of labour in that industry, notwithstanding that, 
at the time the dispute is brought before the Court, 
(1) In one or more states no member of the organization 
of employés which is bringing the plaint is actually employed 
in one of the branches of the industry, or 
(2) In one of the states one of the branches of the industry 
is not carried on, or 
. (3) One of the employers, who carries on all the branches 
i one state and only one branch in another state, is not in 
the former state employing any members of the organization 
in one of the branches, or 
(4) An employer carrying on all the branches in one state