Mathews v Burns [1918] HCA 38
Special leave to appeal refused; the Supreme Court correctly discharged the rule nisi for prohibition as the Magistrate had jurisdiction to order imprisonment in default of payment under the relevant statutes.
- Parties
- Appellant: Mathews; Respondent: Burns
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 12 August 1918
- Procedural Posture
- Application for Special Leave to Appeal / Application for Special Leave to Appeal From Supreme Court Decision
- Outcome
- special leave to appeal refused
- Legal Topics
- Recovery of Dues, Imprisonment in Default of Payment, Jurisdiction of Court, Commonwealth Conciliation and Arbitration Act, Small Debts Recovery Act, Justices Act
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Mathews
Appellant
Burns
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Application for Special Leave to Appeal / Application for Special Leave to Appeal From Supreme Court Decision
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether a magistrate sitting as a Court of Petty Sessions has jurisdiction to order imprisonment in default of payment for union dues under the Commonwealth Conciliation and Arbitration Act
- 2 Whether the proceedings should have been instituted under the Small Debts Recovery Act 1912 (N.S.W.)
- 3 Whether the Central Police Court constituted by a Stipendiary Magistrate is a Court of summary jurisdiction within sec. 68 of the Arbitration Act
Ratio Decidendi
Special leave to appeal refused; the Supreme Court correctly discharged the rule nisi for prohibition as the Magistrate had jurisdiction to order imprisonment in default of payment under the relevant statutes.
Court Disposition
special leave to appeal refused
Orders
- special leave to appeal refused
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