Amalgamated Collieries of WA Ltd v True

The appellant, Amalgamated Collieries of W.A. Ltd., appealed to the High Court of Australia from a decision of the Supreme Court of Western Australia. The dispute concerned the correct calculation of wages for the respondent, Mr. True, a coal miner employed by the appellant. Mr. True was engaged to work at tonnage rates, as stipulated in an award of the Court of Arbitration of Western Australia. The appellant had deducted a sum of £8 1s. 9d. from Mr. True's earnings, claiming this was permissible due to a decrease in the basic wage, which it argued should automatically reduce tonnage rates. Mr. True contended he was entitled to the full tonnage rates as per the award.

The High Court was required to determine two primary legal issues. Firstly, whether the provisions of the *Industrial Arbitration Act 1912-1935* (W.A.), specifically section 124, mandated an automatic adjustment of tonnage rates in response to fluctuations in the basic wage. Secondly, the Court had to consider the application of section 176(2) of the Act, which imposed a twelve-month limitation period on actions for the recovery of wages due under an award, and whether this limitation applied to Mr. True's claim, which was based on a verbal contract incorporating the award's terms.

A majority of the High Court (Latham C.J., Starke and Dixon JJ.) held that the automatic adjustment provision in section 124 of the Act applied only to "day wages" prescribed in the award, not to "tonnage rates." The Court reasoned that tonnage rates were fixed per unit of coal mined, and their calculation was not directly linked to the basic wage in a manner that allowed for automatic adjustment under the statute. Therefore, Mr. True was entitled to the full tonnage rates as specified in the award, irrespective of changes in the basic wage. Regarding the limitation period, the majority found that section 176(2) applied to all actions for the recovery of wages due under an award, even if the claim was also framed as a breach of contract. Consequently, Mr. True could only recover underpayments made within the twelve months preceding the commencement of his action.

The High Court varied the decision of the Supreme Court. While agreeing that tonnage rates were not automatically reduced, the majority ruled that Mr. True's recovery was limited to the amount of underpayment within the twelve months prior to the action's commencement. This resulted in a reduced judgment for Mr. True of £3 8s. 10d., representing the portion of the claimed underpayment that fell within the statutory limitation period.