Smith v R [1913] HCA 54

Smith v R [1913] HCA 54

Once a question as to the period of service for a superannuation claim has been referred to and decided by the Governor in Executive Council under sec. 1 of the Superannuation Act 1871 (W.A.), the Court has no jurisdiction to review or question the correctness of that decision, as the statute makes it final.

Parties
Appellant: William Pugh Smith; Respondent: The Crown
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
29 October 1913
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From Supreme Court of Western Australia
Outcome
Appeal dismissed. Judgment of the Supreme Court of Western Australia affirmed. No order as to costs of the appeal.
Legal Topics
Superannuation, Executive Decisions, Jurisdiction of Courts, Finality of Executive Decisions
Administrative Law Public Service Law Superannuation Executive Decisions Jurisdiction of Courts Finality of Executive Decisions

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 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

William Pugh Smith

Appellant

The Crown

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From Supreme Court of Western Australia

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Court has jurisdiction to review the decision of the Governor in Executive Council under the Superannuation Act 1871 (W.A.), sec. 1 when a question as to the period of service for superannuation arises.

Ratio Decidendi

Once a question as to the period of service for a superannuation claim has been referred to and decided by the Governor in Executive Council under sec. 1 of the Superannuation Act 1871 (W.A.), the Court has no jurisdiction to review or question the correctness of that decision, as the statute makes it final.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed. Judgment of the Supreme Court of Western Australia affirmed. No order as to costs of the appeal.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed.
  • Judgment of McMillan J. affirmed.