Australian Boot Trade Employes Federation v Whybrow and Co [1910] HCA 8

Australian Boot Trade Employes Federation v Whybrow and Co [1910] HCA 8

It is not competent for the Commonwealth Court of Conciliation and Arbitration to make an award inconsistent with State Wages Board determinations, except to the extent parties could lawfully agree to dispense with State law provisions. The proposed award is not inconsistent with State determinations where employers could lawfully agree to pay more than the minimum wage or comply with exceptions, but could not contravene express State prohibitions or directions.

Parties
Claimant: Australian Boot Trade Employees Federation; Respondent: Wuytsrow & Co.; Intervener: Commonwealth; Intervener: State of New South Wales; Intervener: State of Victoria
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
30 March 1910
Procedural Posture
Special Case / Determination of Questions of Law
Outcome
Questions answered: both in the negative by majority; dissenting opinions answered in the affirmative.
Legal Topics
Federal Vs State Jurisdiction, Industrial Disputes, Arbitration, Minimum Wage, Inconsistency of Laws
Constitutional Law Industrial Law Federal Vs State Jurisdiction Industrial Disputes Arbitration Minimum Wage Inconsistency of Laws

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 5 Authorities cited 42 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Australian Boot Trade Employees Federation

Claimant

Wuytsrow & Co.

Respondent

Commonwealth

Intervener

State of New South Wales

Intervener

State of Victoria

Intervener

Procedural Posture

Special Case / Determination of Questions of Law

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Is it competent for the Commonwealth Court of Conciliation and Arbitration to make an award inconsistent with State Wages Board determinations?
  2. 2 Are any provisions of the draft award inconsistent with State Wages Board determinations?

Ratio Decidendi

It is not competent for the Commonwealth Court of Conciliation and Arbitration to make an award inconsistent with State Wages Board determinations, except to the extent parties could lawfully agree to dispense with State law provisions. The proposed award is not inconsistent with State determinations where employers could lawfully agree to pay more than the minimum wage or comply with exceptions, but could not contravene express State prohibitions or directions.

Court Disposition

Questions answered: both in the negative by majority; dissenting opinions answered in the affirmative.

Orders

  • The Commonwealth Court of Conciliation and Arbitration cannot make an award inconsistent with State Wages Board determinations except where parties might lawfully agree to disregard State law.
  • No provision of the draft award is inconsistent with State awards or determinations.