R v Heagney; Ex parte ACT Employers Federation

The High Court of Australia considered an application for prohibition by the ACT Employers Federation against R, seeking to prevent the Industrial Registrar from registering an award variation. The dispute concerned the validity of a proposed variation to an award made by the Australian Conciliation and Arbitration Commission, which the Federation argued was beyond the Commission's power.

The central legal issue before the Court was whether the Commission had the constitutional authority to make the award variation in question. Specifically, the Court had to determine if the subject matter of the variation fell within the scope of industrial disputes as contemplated by section 51(xxxv) of the Australian Constitution, which grants the Commonwealth Parliament power to make laws with respect to conciliation and arbitration for the prevention and settlement of industrial disputes extending beyond the limits of any one State.

The Court reasoned that the power to make an award is confined to the settlement of an industrial dispute. An award variation, to be valid, must therefore be made in settlement of an existing industrial dispute or in the prevention of an apprehended industrial dispute. In this instance, the Court found that the proposed variation did not relate to any existing or apprehended industrial dispute within the meaning of section 51(xxxv) of the Constitution. The variation sought to impose conditions of employment that were not the subject of any dispute between employers and employees, and thus the Commission lacked the constitutional power to make it.

The Court made absolute the order nisi for prohibition, preventing the Industrial Registrar from registering the award variation.