Blackley v Devondale Cream (Vic) Pty Ltd [1968] HCA 2
The federal award and enabling statute intended to provide an exclusive and exhaustive regulation of the wages employers must pay to all employees, unionist and non-unionist. Imposing a further obligation by State law to pay higher wages is inconsistent within the meaning of s. 109 of the Constitution and is thus invalid to the extent of inconsistency.
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Procedural Posture
- Appeal / Final Appeal High Court of Australia
- Outcome
- appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- ['inconsistency Between Federal and State Laws' 'minimum Wage Determination' 'industrial Awards' 's 109 of the Constitution' 'powers of Federal and State Parliaments in Employment Matters']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Final Appeal High Court of Australia
Legal Issues
- 1 ['Whether a State law requiring payment of a higher minimum wage than a federal award is inconsistent with federal law under s. 109 of the Constitution' "Whether obligations imposed by a federal award are exhaustive and exclusive as to employers' payment obligations toward non-unionist employees"]
Ratio Decidendi
The federal award and enabling statute intended to provide an exclusive and exhaustive regulation of the wages employers must pay to all employees, unionist and non-unionist. Imposing a further obligation by State law to pay higher wages is inconsistent within the meaning of s. 109 of the Constitution and is thus invalid to the extent of inconsistency.
Court Disposition
appeal dismissed
Orders
- ['Appeal dismissed with costs.']
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