Merchant Service Guild of Australasia Claimant; and Commonwealth Steamship Owners' Association (No 1) [1920] HCA 40

Merchant Service Guild of Australasia Claimant; and Commonwealth Steamship Owners' Association (No 1) [1920] HCA 40

The High Court may decide under sec. 2144 that a dispute exists as to wages claimed in the 1919 plaint for periods before 1st April 1920, despite subsequent dispute and decision regarding higher wages in 1920, and lack of evidence of abandonment of earlier claims.

Parties
Claimant: The Merchant Service Guild of Australasia; Respondents: Commonwealth Steamship Owners' Association and others
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
18 June 1920
Procedural Posture
Application Under Sec. 2144 of the Commonwealth Conciliation and Arbitration Act 1904 1918 / In Chambers
Outcome
Order that the alleged dispute exists as to the matters claimed in the plaint, as to the time from 21st March 1919 onwards, confined to respondents not subject to previous awards.
Legal Topics
Existence of Industrial Dispute, Wages Claims, Jurisdiction Under Commonwealth Conciliation and Arbitration Act
Industrial Arbitration Employment Law Existence of Industrial Dispute Wages Claims Jurisdiction Under Commonwealth Conciliation and Arbitration Act

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Merchant Service Guild of Australasia

Claimant

Commonwealth Steamship Owners' Association and others

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Application Under Sec. 2144 of the Commonwealth Conciliation and Arbitration Act 1904 1918 / In Chambers

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Can an industrial dispute exist as to past wages under the Act?
  2. 2 Does the High Court have jurisdiction to decide existence of dispute regarding earlier claims when later claims have been made?
  3. 3 Are earlier wage claims abandoned by subsequent higher wage claims?

Ratio Decidendi

The High Court may decide under sec. 2144 that a dispute exists as to wages claimed in the 1919 plaint for periods before 1st April 1920, despite subsequent dispute and decision regarding higher wages in 1920, and lack of evidence of abandonment of earlier claims.

Court Disposition

Order that the alleged dispute exists as to the matters claimed in the plaint, as to the time from 21st March 1919 onwards, confined to respondents not subject to previous awards.

Orders

  • Dispute exists as to 1919 claims for period from 21st March 1919 onwards, this order applies only to respondents not under prior awards.
  • Decision reserved as to respondents claiming exemption under State instrumentalities or covering clause V of the Constitution.