Rae v Simmons

This matter concerned an application for special leave to appeal to the High Court of Australia from a decision of the Supreme Court of New South Wales. The appellant, Rae, had been charged with failing to destroy rabbits on a road bounding his land, as required by section 49 of the *Pastures Protection Act 1902* (NSW). The Pastures Protection Board had specified that the destruction of rabbit harbours, including briar and blackberry bushes, was necessary, which would involve disturbing the surface of the road. The appellant argued that this conflicted with section 75 of the *Local Government Act 1906* (NSW), which vests control and management of public roads in shire councils.

The legal issue before the High Court was whether section 49 of the *Pastures Protection Act 1902* conflicted with section 75 of the *Local Government Act 1906*, thereby rendering the Board's requirements unlawful. The magistrate had found a conflict and dismissed the information, but the Supreme Court of New South Wales overturned this decision, holding that the Board's powers were not in conflict with the council's control of the roads.

The High Court, in refusing special leave to appeal, found the Supreme Court's decision to be "manifestly right." The Court reasoned that the *Pastures Protection Act* imposed a duty on occupiers to destroy rabbits and noxious animals on bounding roads in accordance with the Board's requirements. The *Local Government Act* granted councils control over roads but did not preclude the exercise of powers under other legislation, such as the *Pastures Protection Act*, which mandated specific actions for public benefit. The Court concluded that there was no inherent conflict between the two legislative provisions, and the Board was entitled to require the appellant to take the specified measures.