R v Galvin; Ex parte Australian Textile Workers' Union [1955] HCA 7

R v Galvin; Ex parte Australian Textile Workers' Union [1955] HCA 7

Because ss. 34 and 49 together permitted the conciliation commissioner to vary the award on his own motion, the desired variation could not be outside his jurisdiction merely because the initiating application may have been made by a person without locus standi; prohibition should therefore not issue.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Procedural Posture
Application for Writ of Prohibition / Order Nisi
Outcome
Order nisi discharged with costs.
Legal Topics
['conciliation and Arbitration' 'variation of Awards' 'jurisdiction' 'locus Standi' 'writ of Prohibition']
['industrial Law' 'administrative Law'] ['conciliation and Arbitration' 'variation of Awards' 'jurisdiction' 'locus Standi' 'writ of Prohibition']

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 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 1 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Application for Writ of Prohibition / Order Nisi

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether a conciliation commissioner lacked jurisdiction to entertain an application to vary an award where the applicant was not a party to the industrial dispute and was not bound by the award within s. 34 of the Conciliation and Arbitration Act 1904-1952.' 'Whether prohibition should issue when the conciliation commissioner could make the desired variation of the award on his own motion.']

Ratio Decidendi

Because ss. 34 and 49 together permitted the conciliation commissioner to vary the award on his own motion, the desired variation could not be outside his jurisdiction merely because the initiating application may have been made by a person without locus standi; prohibition should therefore not issue.

Court Disposition

Order nisi discharged with costs.

Orders

  • ['Order nisi discharged with costs.']