Coffey v The Commonwealth [1969] HCA 22

Coffey v The Commonwealth [1969] HCA 22

Regulation 14 (1) of the Public Service Regulations is valid because its operation is to enable a chief officer to require an officer to make up time lost through unauthorised absence, not to impose punishment, so it is not inconsistent with s. 55 of the Public Service Act 1922-1966; it is also supported by the regulation-making power in s. 97, including at least the opening words and possibly pars. (k) and (m).

Jurisdiction
Australia
Procedural Posture
Appeal / High Court Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
['validity of Regulations' 'public Service Regulations' 'inconsistency With Statute' 'regulation Making Power']

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

Appeal / High Court Appeal

  1. 1 ['Whether reg. 14 (1) of the Public Service Regulations is invalid because it is inconsistent with s. 55 of the Public Service Act 1922-1966.' 'Whether reg. 14 (1) of the Public Service Regulations goes beyond the authority intended to be given by s. 97 of the Public Service Act 1922-1966, having regard to s. 55.']

Ratio Decidendi

Regulation 14 (1) of the Public Service Regulations is valid because its operation is to enable a chief officer to require an officer to make up time lost through unauthorised absence, not to impose punishment, so it is not inconsistent with s. 55 of the Public Service Act 1922-1966; it is also supported by the regulation-making power in s. 97, including at least the opening words and possibly pars. (k) and (m).

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • ['Appeal dismissed with costs.']