Re Australian Conciliation and Arbitration Commission; Ex parte Graham [1977] HCA 20
The Commission had jurisdiction to make and vary the interim awards, including as to non-union employees; the awards were within the ambit of the dispute as extended by the union's and companies' demands and correspondence; applicant’s grounds for prohibition (including alleged procedural defects and alleged excess of jurisdiction) fail.
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Procedural Posture
- Application for Prohibition / Return of Order Nisi
- Outcome
- Order nisi discharged
- Legal Topics
- ['industrial Disputes' 'awards' 'federal Vs State Jurisdiction' 'union Membership' 'interim Awards' 'scope of Commission Powers']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Application for Prohibition / Return of Order Nisi
Legal Issues
- 1 ['Did the Commission have jurisdiction to make and vary interim awards in the disputes between unions and oil companies?' 'Were the interim awards beyond the ambit of the dispute?' 'Validity of union preference clause (clause 41) in interim award' 'Whether the Commission exceeded its powers by making awards regarding non-union employees']
Ratio Decidendi
The Commission had jurisdiction to make and vary the interim awards, including as to non-union employees; the awards were within the ambit of the dispute as extended by the union's and companies' demands and correspondence; applicant’s grounds for prohibition (including alleged procedural defects and alleged excess of jurisdiction) fail.
Court Disposition
Order nisi discharged
Orders
- ['Order nisi discharged']
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment