Australian Timber Workers' Union v John Sharp & Sons Ltd [1919] HCA 38; (1919) 26 CLR 302 (4 August 1919)

HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA

The Australian Timber Workers' Union Claimant; and John Sharp & Sons Limited and Others Respondents.

H C of A

4 August 1919

Higgins J.

Foster, for the claimant organization.

Stanley Lewis and Owen Dixon, for some of the respondents.

Robertson, for other respondents.

J Higgins read the following judgment:—

Aug. 4

Higgins J

This is an application for a decision under sec. 21AA of the Commonwealth Conciliation and Arbitration Act. There has been considerable difficulty in finding which of the respondents to the plaint are parties severally to the numerous items of the log; inasmuch as the log affects employers so diverse as proprietors of bush mills, proprietors of timber yards, proprietors of furniture warehouses, and so forth. An important point of law was raised by respondents who have timber yards in Western Australia. They have, for instance, machinists of different varieties employed; but at present none of the machinists actually employed are members of the claimant Union. There are plenty of wood machinists in the Union, and there is no reason for thinking that they would not take employment with these respondents if they can get satisfactory terms. In the case of Australian Workers' Union v. Pastoralists' Federal Council[1] I held that there is nothing in the Constitution or in the Act forbidding the finding of a dispute between a union and employers, even if no members of the union are actually in the employment of a respondent; and that, even if this view be incorrect, there is a probable dispute, if members of the union would probably apply to the respondent for employment. At first Mr. Dixon asked me to state a case for the opinion of the High Court on the subject. I am always chary of refusing a request by counsel for a case to be stated for the full High Court, inasmuch as my decision under sec. 21AA is not subject to any appeal. But eventually Mr. Dixon withdrew his request. I therefore follow my own decision in the Pastoralists' Case.

[The learned Judge then made an order which is not material to this report.]

Solicitors for the claimant, Brennan & Rundle.

Solicitors for the respondents, Derham, Robertson & Derham.

[1] [1917] HCA 17; 23 C.L.R., 22.