JACOBS V. GRAY 6/1941

JACOBS V. GRAY 6/1941

The regulation is to be construed as imposing an obligation to furnish a return only for eggs produced by fowls owned or present during the period of twelve months immediately preceding the notice; the notice in question exceeded that period and was thus not authorized by the regulation.

Parties
Appellant: Jacobs; Respondent: Gray
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
28 March 1941
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment
Outcome
appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Interpretation of Regulations, Marketing of Primary Products, Statutory Construction
Administrative Law Interpretation of Regulations Marketing of Primary Products Statutory Construction

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 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Jacobs

Appellant

Gray

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the notice to furnish a return pursuant to regulation 37 of the Egg and Egg Pulp Marketing Board Regulations 1937 was authorized by the regulation
  2. 2 Scope and period for which a producer may be required to furnish a return of eggs produced

Ratio Decidendi

The regulation is to be construed as imposing an obligation to furnish a return only for eggs produced by fowls owned or present during the period of twelve months immediately preceding the notice; the notice in question exceeded that period and was thus not authorized by the regulation.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed

Orders

  • Order discharging order nisi set aside
  • Order nisi to review made absolute