Legal Research
Cases
Sweeney v Fitzhardinge

Sweeney v Fitzhardinge

Case [1906] HCA 73 27 November 1906

Appeal

Judicial Review

Jurisdiction

Statutory Construction

Administrative Law

Statutory Interpretation

No judgment structure available for this case.

Type to search within this case.

716 HIGH COUliT

[1906.

H. G. OF A

Appeal allowed with coxts. Order appealed

1906. fi'om dixcharged %rith. cuxtx. Rule ah-

G u k v il u c

xolute to evter judgincnt for the. p la in

tiff iv it! i costs for .£’829 14-s'.

xabject

WiT.LTAMS.

to an agreement signed by counsel and

filed in Court.

Foil

Solicitors, for the appellant, Aitken & Aitken.

i f *

Solicitor, for the respondent, The Crown Solicitor of New

Refd to

South Wides.

Stamps, .

Commissioner

Refd to

Teleffxtph

Cons

Stamps.

Hooper V

C. A. W.

fnvestmeni Co C om rots

(1995) 133

Territory

ALR130

Investment CoTcUfftiii

Insurance

(1995) 184

Office (2002)

CLR453

ITNTLR 182

Cons

Le Blanc v

Old TAB Lid

p̂003] 2 OdR

[HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA.]

SWEENEY

7\.1>I’EI.L.\XT :

FITZHARDINGE AND OTHERS .

R e s p o n d e n t s .

ON APPEAL FROM TH E SUPREM E COURT OF

NEW SOUTH WALES.

H. C. OF A, Liquor Acl {N'.S. IF.), {Xo. 18 o f 1898), sec. 108 — Liquor (Ameiidmeul] Act

1906. [N.S. IF.), {Xo. 40 o f 1905), sec^. 46-52—lieqintratioii o f club—Appeal to Quarter Sesfiions from an order o f Licensinq Court — lie-hearing.

S y d n k y ,

The Liquor {Amendment) Act 1905, which was passed for the purposes, Wor. 21, 22, amongst others, of making fresh provision for the control of the sale of liquor

23, 27.in houses licensed under the Principal Act, and also for placing cliib.s in which

Griffith C.J., liquor was sold on a footing analogous to tha t of licensed houses, gives the

Barton and

Licensing Courts iurisdiction to deal with the registration of sucli clubs, and to

Isaacs

JJ .

make orders in respect thereof. Sec. 1 provides th a t the Act sliall be “ con strued with the Liquor Act 1898” thereinafter referred to as tlie Principal Act.

Sec. 108 of the Liquor Act 1898 provided tha t “ Any person aggrieved by any adjudication of a Licensing Court . . . made under this A ct,” subject to certain exceptions, inaj’ appeal to the Court of Quarter Sessions, which “ shall have power to hear and determine the m atter of the appeal in a

4 C.L.K.] OF AUHTKALIA.

717

summary way, and shall and may exercise all the powers conferred by sec. .1

H. C. OF A.

of the Act 5 Wm. IV'. No. 22,” and the InterprttaUon Act 1897, sec. 12, pro1906.

vided that every Act amending an Act should be construed with the amended

Act and as part thereof, unless the contrary intention should appear in the

SWEKNEV

amending Act.

F it z -

H.4RDINOE.

Held, th a t the Liquor {Amendment) Act 1905 should be construed as part of the Liqtior Act 1898, and therefore, by sec. lOS of the la tter Act, an appeal lies to Quarter Sessions from an order made by a Licensing Court under the former Act, granting registration…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading Sweeney v Fitzhardinge

Details

AGLC: Sweeney v Fitzhardinge [1906] HCA 73
Case: [1906] HCA 73
Decision Date: 27 November 1906

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In *Sweeney v Fitzhardinge*, the Supreme Court of New South Wales considered an appeal from a decision of the Licensing Court. The dispute concerned the registration of a club.

The primary legal issue before the Court was whether the Quarter Sessions had the power to rehear the matter of the club's registration, or if their jurisdiction was limited to reviewing the Licensing Court's decision on the evidence presented to that court.

The Court held that the Quarter Sessions, upon an appeal from the Licensing Court, had the power to rehear the case de novo. This meant they could consider fresh evidence and make their own independent findings of fact and law, rather than being confined to the record of the proceedings in the Licensing Court. The Court reasoned that the relevant legislation, specifically sections 46-52 of the *Licensing Act 1901* (NSW), contemplated a full rehearing on appeal.

The Court therefore dismissed the appeal, upholding the Quarter Sessions' right to rehear the matter.

Orders