Re Roy Edward Hegarty and ORS; Ex Parte the Corporation of the City of Salisbury1
| Author | Robert Weber |
| Published date | 01 December 1981 |
| Date | 01 December 1981 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1177/0067205X8101200405 |
| Subject Matter | Article |
368 Federal Law Review
(VOLUME
12
RE
ROY
EDWARD
HEGARTY
AND ORS;
EX
PARTE
THE
CORPORATION
OF
THE
CITY
OF
SALISBURYl
Constitutional Law -Separation
of
Judicial Power -Constitution
s.
5J(xxxv) -Dispute
as
to classification
of
employee under Common-
wealth
Award-
Whether dispute extends beyond the limits
of
any one
State
This decision provided yet another opportunity for the High Court to
consider the vexed question of the doctrine of separation of powers. The
case arose out of a minor industrial dispute under the Commonwealth
Municipal Officers (South Australia) Award 1973. The Municipal Officers'
Association of Australia and the Prosecutor were in dispute concerning an
application for the reclassification of one Tyler
as
a Drafting Officer Grade
3.
Clause 6 ( 1)
(c)
of the Award provides that disputes concerning questions
of classification of employees could be brought before the Board of Refer-
ence constituted under the Award. Clause 27 of the Award deals with the
constitution and functions of the Board of Reference, and provides:
(a)
A Board of Reference for the purpose of this award shall be
constituted and shall consist of two persons to be from time to time
appointed by a respondent Council and two persons appointed from
time to time by The Municipal Officers' Association of Australia and
the Association of Architects, Engineers, Surveyors and Draughtsmen
of Australia, with the Deputy Industrial Registrar for South Australia,
or
his nominee,
as
Chairman. Three members shall form a quorum.
The Board shall sit at such time and place
as
the parties may agree,
or
in default of agreement
as
the Chairman may
fix.
The functions of
the Board shall
be-
(i)
to consider any matters pertaining to this award brought before
it from time to time by a respondent Council or by The Municipal
Officers' Association of Australia
or
by the Association of
Architects, Engineers, Surveyors and Draughtsmen of Australia;
(ii) to inquire into and if possible settle differences between the
Associations and any respondent Council; and
(iii) to decide by a majority decision any
matter
which by this part of
this award
is
assigned to the Board of Reference for determination.
(b)
The Board of Reference shall not be empowered to determine
or
fix
the salary of an officer.
(c)
Nothing in this clause shall prevent any party from applying to
the Australian Industrial Court for an interpretation of any clause of
this award.
(d)
There shall be an appeal from any decision of the Board of
Reference to the Australian Conciliation and Arbitration Commission.
Such appeal shall be lodged within
21
days of the decision of the
Board.
At
the hearing before the Board, the Prosecutor objected to the Board's
jurisdiction, claiming that the function entrusted to it involved exercising
1 (1981) 36 A.L.R. 275. High Court
of
Australia, Gibbs C.J., Stephen, Mason,
Wilson and Murphy JJ.
To continue reading
Request your trial