Williams v Attorney-General (NSW) [1913] HCA 33

Williams v Attorney-General (NSW) [1913] HCA 33

The Attorney-General for New South Wales was not entitled to maintain the action as framed because there had been no dedication or setting apart of Government House and its grounds that created enforceable rights against the Crown; thus, the land remained waste land of the Crown under the control of the New South Wales government following the Constitution Act 1855. The absence of the representation of the Crown in its Imperial right as a party to the suit was fatal to the respondent’s case.

Parties
Appellant; Defendant: James Leslie Williams; Respondent; Informant: The Attorney-General for New South Wales (on the relation of Cocks and others)
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
19 June 1913
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Appeal From the Supreme Court of New South Wales to the High Court of Australia
Outcome
Appeal allowed. Suit dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
Waste Lands of the Crown, Public Dedication, Standing of the Attorney General, Crown as Party Litigant, Trusts and Public Purposes
Constitutional Law Crown Lands Waste Lands of the Crown Public Dedication Standing of the Attorney General Crown as Party Litigant Trusts and Public Purposes

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 17 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

James Leslie Williams

Appellant; Defendant

The Attorney-General for New South Wales (on the relation of Cocks and others)

Respondent; Informant

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Appeal From the Supreme Court of New South Wales to the High Court of Australia

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Government House and its grounds in Sydney were permanently dedicated or set apart for the public purpose of a residence for the Sovereign's representative in New South Wales, such that the Government of New South Wales could not alter their use.
  2. 2 Whether the Attorney-General for New South Wales could maintain the action to enforce an alleged public trust against the Government (as represented by a nominal defendant) under the Claims against the Government and Crown Suits Act 1912.
  3. 3 Whether the lands in question constitute 'waste lands of the Crown' within the meaning of the New South Wales Constitution Act 1855, and therefore passed to the control of the legislature and, subject to the legislature, the Executive Government of New South Wales.

Ratio Decidendi

The Attorney-General for New South Wales was not entitled to maintain the action as framed because there had been no dedication or setting apart of Government House and its grounds that created enforceable rights against the Crown; thus, the land remained waste land of the Crown under the control of the New South Wales government following the Constitution Act 1855. The absence of the representation of the Crown in its Imperial right as a party to the suit was fatal to the respondent’s case.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed. Suit dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • Order appealed from discharged.
  • Suit dismissed with costs.