Flint v Bannigan [1917] HCA 72

Flint v Bannigan [1917] HCA 72

A retail seller of hardware employing a driver of a one-horse vehicle is bound by the Carriers and Drivers Board determination regarding minimum wages and may be convicted if they only pay the Hardware Board's rate.

Parties
Appellant: Thomas Flint; Respondent: John Bannigan; Employee: Harry A. Bradley
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
17 December 1917
Procedural Posture
Application for Special Leave to Appeal / Application Dismissed
Outcome
special leave to appeal refused
Legal Topics
Wages, Wages Boards, Factories Act 1907 (s.a.)
Employment Law Wages Wages Boards Factories Act 1907 (s.a.)

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 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Thomas Flint

Appellant

John Bannigan

Respondent

Harry A. Bradley

Employee

Procedural Posture

Application for Special Leave to Appeal / Application Dismissed

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a retail seller of hardware employing a driver of a one-horse vehicle is bound by the determination of the Carriers and Drivers Board or the Hardware Board regarding minimum wages
  2. 2 Whether special leave to appeal should be granted

Ratio Decidendi

A retail seller of hardware employing a driver of a one-horse vehicle is bound by the Carriers and Drivers Board determination regarding minimum wages and may be convicted if they only pay the Hardware Board's rate.

Court Disposition

special leave to appeal refused

Orders

  • application dismissed