Legal Research
Cases
Blackley v Devondale Cream (Vic) Pty Ltd

Blackley v Devondale Cream (Vic) Pty Ltd

Link copied

Case Copied 2 February 1968 35 min read

Contents

On this page

HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Barwick C.J., McTiernan, Kitto, Taylor, Menzies JJ.

BLACKLEY v. DEVONDALE CREAM (VIC.) PTY. LTD.

(1968) 117 CLR 253

2 February 1968

Constitutional Law (Cth)

Constitutional Law (Cth)—Inconsistency between Commonwealth and State laws—Award of Commonwealth Industrial Commission binding employers in respect of wages paid to non-unionists—Determination of State Wages Board prescribing minimum wage payable to employees—Non-unionists within operation of determination—Whether determination binding—Validity—The Constitution (63 &64 Vict. c. 12), s. 109—Conciliation and Arbitration Act 1904-1961 (Cth), ss. 61, 119—Labour and Industry Act 1958 (Vict.), ss. 198, 199, 200.

Decisions

1968, February 2.
The following written judgments were delivered: -
BARWICK C.J. At the time relevant to these proceedings the respondent company employed one Macdonald to do work which was covered by a classification of work in an award made by the Commonwealth Conciliation and Arbitration Commission and known as the Transport Workers (General) Award (the award). By the award, the Commission prescribed, ordered and awarded that "the minimum rate of wage required to be paid by employers" who included members of an organization of employers of which the respondent was a member "shall . . . comprise the amount of the basic wage . . . and in addition the amount assigned in the following table . . . for an employee or work of a class indicated therein" (cl. 10). (at p256)

2. The obligation of the employers under the award extended so far as to require them to pay the prescribed wages to each of their employees whether or not the employee was a member of an organization of employees which was party to or bound by the award. Macdonald was not at any relevant time a member of any such organization. He was, however, a member of the Cold Storage Union of Victoria. (at p256)

3. There was current at the relevant time a determination of a wages board, namely, the Frozen Goods Board, set up under the Labour and Industry Act 1958 of the State of Victoria (the Victorian Act). The determination, which applies to the whole of the State of Victoria, is known as the Frozen Goods Determination, No. 1 of 1964. It purported to specify minimum rates of wages to be paid to persons employed in the process, trade, business, or occupation of freezing or refrigerating goods of any kind for the purpose of trade or sale, including the packing and grading of such goods with certain immaterial exceptions. It also specified a great number of working conditions. Section 198 (1) of the Victorian Act provides that where any employer employs any person on work for which the lowest prices or rates have been fixed in such a determination, the employer shall be liable to pay and shall pay to such persons the price or rate so determined in full in money without any deduction whatever. The employee Macdonald was a person employed in a business covered by the determination. The amount fixed as the minimum rate by the Frozen…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Blackley v Devondale Cream (Vic) Pty Ltd and more:

Read every judgment in full
Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
Download judgments as PDF or Word

Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details

Case: [1968] HCA 2
Decision Date: 2 February 1968

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The High Court of Australia heard an appeal from a decision of the Supreme Court of Victoria in a dispute between Blackley, the appellant, and Devondale Cream (Vic) Pty Ltd, the respondent. The case concerned the respondent's liability for damages allegedly suffered by the appellant as a result of the respondent's negligence.

The central legal issue before the High Court was whether the respondent owed a duty of care to the appellant, and if so, whether that duty had been breached, causing the appellant's loss. Specifically, the court had to determine if the respondent's actions, or omissions, in relation to the appellant's dairy farm operations constituted a breach of a duty of care that was reasonably foreseeable and likely to cause harm.

The High Court, in its judgment, considered the principles of negligence, particularly the foreseeability of harm and the proximity between the parties. The court analysed the specific circumstances of the appellant's reliance on the respondent's services and the potential consequences of any failure on the respondent's part. The judges applied established legal tests for establishing a duty of care and for determining whether that duty had been breached, considering the standard of care expected of a reasonable and prudent dairy company in similar circumstances.

The appeal was dismissed, with the High Court finding that the respondent had not breached any duty of care owed to the appellant. Consequently, the appellant was not entitled to recover damages from the respondent.

Orders