Amalgamated Society of Engineers Claimant; and Adelaide Steamship Company Limited

The parties to this matter were the Amalgamated Society of Engineers (claimant) and the Adelaide Steamship Company Limited and other employers, including State Ministers, as respondents. The dispute concerned the existence of an industrial dispute within the meaning of the Commonwealth Constitution and the Conciliation and Arbitration Act, particularly in relation to State Ministers as employers. Motions were brought before the High Court of Australia seeking a certificate under section 74 of the Constitution to permit an appeal to the Privy Council on questions relating to the constitutional powers of the Commonwealth and the States.

The legal issues before the High Court were whether the questions of law arising from decisions concerning the existence of industrial disputes involving State Ministers, and the extent of the Commonwealth's legislative and executive powers in relation to the States, ought to be determined by His Majesty in Council. Specifically, the Court was asked to consider whether a certificate should be granted to allow an appeal on matters such as the reciprocal operation of the rule in *D'Emden v. Pedder*, the applicability of the *Expressio unius est exclusio alterius* maxim, the subjection of a State's Crown to Commonwealth Court jurisdiction, and the impact of section 106 of the Constitution on Commonwealth legislation affecting State Constitutions.

A majority of the High Court, comprising Knox C.J., Higgins, Rich, and Starke JJ., held that a certificate under section 74 of the Constitution should not be granted. The reasoning of the majority was that while the questions were of significant constitutional importance and involved a re-examination of established principles, the Court itself had arrived at a clear and definite decision by a large majority in the underlying case, *Amalgamated Society of Engineers v. Adelaide Steamship Co. Ltd.*. The majority considered that there were no "special reasons" that necessitated an appeal to the Privy Council, as contemplated by section 74, and that the High Court was capable of determining these matters itself. Justices Gavan Duffy and Powers dissented.

The motions for a certificate under section 74 of the Constitution were dismissed by the High Court.