Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-v2bm5 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-27T13:13:30.302Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

China Ocean Shipping Co. and Others v. South Australia

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 January 2025

Phillipa C. Weeks
Phillipa C. Weeks*
Affiliation:
Faculty of Law, Australian National University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Constitutional law—Applicability of Imperial law in Australia—Whether Merchant Shipping Act 1894-1900 (U.K.) extends to South Australia—Whether U.K. Act applies to the Crown of its own force or by virtue of Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth) — Merchant Shipping Act 1894 (U.K.) Merchant Shipping (Liability of Shipowners and Others) Act 1900 (U.K.) — Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth)

Type
Case Notes
Information
Federal Law Review , Volume 11 , Issue 2 , June 1980 , pp. 229 - 237
Copyright
Copyright © 1980 The Australian National University

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 (1979) 27 A.L.R. 1. High Court of Australia; Barwick C.J., Gibbs, Stephen, Murphy and Aickin JJ.

2 On the question whether the “agent” of the ship could bring limitation proceedings, Stephen and Aickin JJ. held that an answer was not necessary, Gibbs J. answered “No” and Barwick C.J. answered “Yes”. Murphy J. must be taken to have answered “No.”. The order of the Court read: “As to the agent. Not answered.”

3 (1979) 27 A.L.R. 1, 25.

4 Cowen, and Zines, , Federal Jurisdiction in Australia (2nd ed. 1978) 228Google Scholar. The authors recommended that the doubts and difficulties in relation to this issue should be resolved by the enactment of Commonwealth legislation: 233. Aickin J. acknowledged the difficulties and noted that “they are . . . readily solved by legislation”, (1979) 27 A.L.R. 1, 57.

5 (1976) 11 A.L.R. 129.

6 (1977) 16 A.L.R. 623.

7 (1979) 27 A.L.R. 1, 7.

8 Aickin J. expressed himself to be “in complete agreement” with Stephen J. on this question, id. 54. Barwick C.J. also fully agreed with Stephen J., but he added some comments, id. 7.

9 Id. 29.

10 Id. 29-30.

11 Id. 7, 8.

12 Id. 31.

13 Id. 31-32.

14 Id. 18.

15 Gibbs J. reiterated this view in the contemporaneous case before the High Court, Southern Centre of Theosophy Inc. v. South Australia (1979) 27 A.L.R. 59, 65. “The fact that there has since been a change in the political or constitutional relationship between the United Kingdom and South Australia does not cause part of the existing law of South Australia to disappear “Barwick C.J., Stephen, Mason, Aickin and Wilson JI. fully agreed with the reasons.

16 (1979) 27 A.L.R. 1, 7 per Barwick C.J., 32 per Stephen J.

17 Id. 53.

18 Id. 51.

19 Id. 52.

20 Professor Geoffrey Sawer has argued the possibility that s. 128 may apply to State constitutional law and Imperial legislation: “The British Connection” (1973) .47 A.L.J. 113, 113-114. Cf. Wynes, , Legislative, Executive and Judicial Powers in Australia (5th ed. 1976) 541-542.Google Scholar

21 Smith, De, Constitutional and Administrative Law (3rd ed. 1977) 66-67.Google Scholar

22 Id. 68.

23 Dixon, , “The Statute of Westminster 1931” (1936) 10 A.L.J. Supp. 96, 106.Google Scholar

24 De Smith, op. cit. 64.

25 (1907) 4 C.L.R. 1087, 1121; quoted (1979) 27 A.L.R. 1, 50-51.

26 Commonwealth v. Kreglinger and Fernau Ltd (1926) 37 C.L.R. 393, 412; cited (1979) 27 A.L.R. 1, 52.

27 (1979) 27 A.L.R. 1, 52.

28 Dixon, op. cit. 97.

29 (1979) 27 A.L.R. 1, 53.

30 Supra n. 5.

31 Bickovskii, , “No Deliberate Innovators: Mr Justice Murphy and the Australian Constitution” (1977) 8 F.L. Rev. 460, 468.Google Scholar

32 Id. 469.

33 Id. 470.

34 Cooray, , Conventions, The Australian Constitution and the Future (1979).Google Scholar

35 Id. 95-98. See also Blackshield, , “The Abolition of Privy Council Appeals: Judicial Responsibility and ‘The Law for Australia’” (1978) Adelaide Law Review Research Paper No. 1, 169-174.Google Scholar

36 Id. 98.

37 Id. 100.

38 Case Note, Bistricic v. Rokov (1977) 8 F.L. Rev. 346, 353-356.

39 (1979) 27 A.L.R. 1, 33.

40 Act No. 98, 1979.

41 Press Release by the Attorney-General (Cth), 76/79, 13 October 1979.

42 Constitution Powers (New South Wales) Act 1978 (N.S.W.) and Constitution Powers (Tasmania) Act 1979. The Constitutional Powers (Request) Bill, introduced in the Victorian Legislative Council on 5 June 1979, makes a similar request in respect of Victoria.