Long v Chubbs Australian Company Limited

The appellant, William Christopher Long, a member of the Amalgamated Engineering Union, appealed to the High Court of Australia from a decision of a Court of Petty Sessions of New South Wales. The appeal concerned an information laid by the appellant alleging that the respondent, Chubbs Australian Company Limited, had breached an award of the Commonwealth Court of Conciliation and Arbitration. The alleged breach was the engagement of a minor in the occupation of fitting and turning without a contract of apprenticeship framed in conformity with the award, despite the award stipulating that such minors could only be engaged under such contracts. Both the union and the respondent company were parties to the award, but the minor in question was not a member of the union. The magistrate had dismissed the information on the grounds that the award did not apply to non-unionist employees.

The central legal issue before the High Court was whether the provision in the Commonwealth Court of Conciliation and Arbitration award, which mandated that minors be engaged only under contracts of apprenticeship, was valid and enforceable even in relation to minors who were not members of the industrial union that was a party to the award. The respondent company contended that this provision was beyond the jurisdiction of the Commonwealth Court of Conciliation and Arbitration because it purported to regulate the employment of non-unionists, who were neither parties to the industrial dispute nor represented by an organisation that was a party to it.

The High Court held that the information was wrongly dismissed. The Court reasoned that the provision concerning the engagement of minors under contracts of apprenticeship was within the ambit of the industrial dispute that the award sought to resolve. The Court found that the Commonwealth Conciliation and Arbitration Act contemplated the regulation of apprentices, including those who were not members of industrial organisations, as an "industrial matter." The Court distinguished the situation from one where rights were directly conferred upon non-parties, stating that the provision created rights and duties enforceable between the parties to the award. While the employer and apprentice would have contractual rights and duties arising from their apprenticeship agreement, these did not stem directly from the award itself. The Court considered that the regulation of apprenticeship was a matter of direct and substantial interest to tradesmen, members of the union, as it affected the conditions of juvenile labour and training within the industry, and thus could be validly included in an award.

Consequently, the High Court allowed the appeal with costs, set aside the order appealed from, and remitted the information to the magistrate to be dealt with according to law.