Mitchforce Pty Ltd v Industrial Relations Commission of NSW

Mitchforce Pty Ltd sought judicial review of orders made by Hungerford J of the Industrial Relations Commission of New South Wales. The dispute concerned the validity of a privative clause within the *Industrial Relations Act 1996* (NSW) and its effect on the appellate jurisdiction of the High Court of Australia, as well as the Commission's power to review contracts for work performed in industry.

The primary legal issue before the Court of Appeal of New South Wales was whether the privative clause, which purported to limit the jurisdiction of courts to review decisions of the Industrial Relations Commission, was constitutionally valid. This involved considering the principles established in *Hickman v. The Queen* and their application to the NSW legislation, particularly in light of the High Court's constitutional role. The court also had to determine the scope of the Commission's power to review contracts for work performed in industry under the relevant NSW legislation.

The Court of Appeal, in a majority decision, found that the privative clause was invalid to the extent that it sought to oust the supervisory jurisdiction of the Supreme Court of New South Wales over the Industrial Relations Commission. The court reasoned that the clause, by its indirect effect, would impermissibly impair the appellate jurisdiction of the High Court of Australia. The court applied the established principles that state legislation cannot validly withdraw from the High Court its constitutional jurisdiction.

Consequently, the Court of Appeal quashed orders 11 and 12 made by Hungerford J on 14 November 2000. The court also ordered that the balance of the summons be stood over for further argument, taking into account the majority reasons of the Court of Appeal and any further steps that might be taken in the Industrial Relations Commission.