R v Hibble; Ex parte Broken Hill Proprietary Co Ltd

The applicant, Broken Hill Proprietary Co Ltd, sought a writ of prohibition from the High Court of Australia against the respondent, R Hibble, who was acting as the chairman of a special tribunal. The dispute concerned an award made by the tribunal, and the applicant contended that the tribunal had acted without jurisdiction.

The primary legal issue before the High Court was whether a writ of prohibition could be issued to a tribunal that had already made its award, even if it was alleged to have acted without jurisdiction. The court was required to consider the scope of the High Court's jurisdiction under section 75(v) of the Constitution, which grants the High Court original jurisdiction in matters of prohibition against officers of the Commonwealth.

The court reasoned that the writ of prohibition is a preventive remedy, designed to stop a tribunal from exceeding its jurisdiction before it acts. However, it also acknowledged that prohibition could lie to quash an order already made if the tribunal had no jurisdiction to make it in the first place and there was nothing further to be done by that tribunal. The court applied the principle that if a tribunal acts without jurisdiction, its orders are a nullity, and prohibition can be used to prevent the enforcement of such nullities.

The High Court made absolute the order nisi for prohibition, quashing the award made by the respondent.