President of India v Moor Line Ltd (No 2)

This case concerned an appeal to the High Court of Australia from a decision of the Full Court of the Supreme Court of Victoria. The dispute originated from an arbitration between the President of India, as charterer of the M.V. Exmoor, and the vessel's owner, the Moor Line Limited. An umpire had stated a case for the opinion of the Supreme Court of Victoria under section 19 of the *Arbitration Act 1928* (Vic.).

The legal issues before the High Court were whether the Supreme Court of Victoria had jurisdiction to entertain an appeal from an opinion given on a case stated by an arbitrator, and whether it had jurisdiction to make orders as to the costs of such proceedings. The High Court also considered the appropriate orders to make in light of its determination on jurisdiction.

The High Court reasoned that an opinion of the Supreme Court on a case stated under section 19 of the *Arbitration Act 1928* (Vic.) is advisory in nature. Consequently, no appeal lies from such an opinion. The Court further held that, following the precedent set in *In re Arbitration between Groutch and the State Rivers and Water Supply Commission*, the Supreme Court has no jurisdiction to make an order as to the costs of a case stated. Although the Full Court of the Supreme Court had entertained an appeal and made orders as to costs, this was done without jurisdiction, as the point had not been taken in that court.

The High Court allowed the appeal from the Full Court of the Supreme Court of Victoria, discharged the order of that court, and set aside so much of the order of O'Bryan J. as awarded costs to the President of India. The Court held that it had no jurisdiction over the advisory part of O'Bryan J.'s order, which therefore remained untouched. No order was made as to costs in the High Court or in the Supreme Court.