Williams v Macharg - [1910] UKPCHCA 1

Public Service-Officer-Superannuation allowance-Period - of service-Temporary -

employment-Public Service (Superannuation) Act 1899 (N.S. W.) (No. 55 of 1899)-Civil Service Act 1884 (N.S. W.) (48 Vict. No. 24), secs. 2, 43, 48.

An officer of the Public Service of New South Wales, whose services were dispensed with on 30th September 1896 and who became entitled to a super- annuation allowance under the Public Service (Superannuation) Act 1899 (N.S.W.), was from 24th September 1868 until 10th September 1872 em- ployed by the Government of New South Wales as a "temporary draftsman."

Held, on the facts, that during that period he was an "officer" within the definition of that word in sec. 2 of the Civil Service Act 1884 (N.S.W.) and that his service during that period should be taken into account in computing his superannuation allowance under sec. 48 of the Civil Service Act 1884 (N.S.W.).

Walker v. Simpson, (1903) A.C., 208, explained. Decision of the High Court (Williams v. Macharg, 7 C.L.R., 213) affirmed.

APPEAL to His Majesty in Council from the decision of the High Court: Williams v. Macharg 1.

The judgment of their Lordships was delivered by

LORD MACNAGHTEN. The respondent, John Macharg, was a member of the New South Wales Civil Service at the date of the passing of the Public Service Act 1895.

Within twelve months from the commencement of that Act his services were dispensed

Present-Lord Macnaghten, Lord Collins, Lord Shaw, and Sir Arthur Wilson.

17 C.L.R., 213.

10 CLR 600

with by the Public Service Board, but not for any offence or through any fault on his part. As he had not then attained the age of 60 years, he had no claim to a superannuation allowance under sec. 43 of the Civil Service Act 1884. He received a refund of his contributions to the Civil Service Superannuation Account and the gratuity payable under the Act of 1895. After- wards, on the passing of the Public Service Superannuation Act 1899, he became entitled to receive the superannuation allowance to which he would have been entitled if he had retired under the provisions of sec. 43 of the Act of 1884, subject to the deduction or diminution specified in the Act of 1899.

Sec. 48 of the Act of 1884 declares that the following shall be the scale of superannuation allowances payable under the Act:- "To any officer who shall have served 15 years a superannuation allowance equal to one-fourth of his annual salary with an addition of one-sixtieth part of such salary for each additional year of service, but in no case shall such superannuation allow- ance exceeds two-thirds of his annual salary." The allowance was to be computed upon the average annual amount of salary or emoluments other than forage equipment or travelling allow- ance received during the preceding three years.

The respondent first entered the service of the Government on 24th September 1868, as an officer in a newly-constituted branch of the Department of Crown Lands called…

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.

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Williams v Macharg and more:

Read every judgment in full
Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
Download judgments as PDF or Word

Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details

Case: [1910] UKPCHCA 1
Decision Date: 7 June 1910

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the case of Williams v Macharg, the appellant, John Macharg, sought to include a period of temporary employment in the calculation of his superannuation allowance under the Public Service (Superannuation) Act 1899 (N.S.W.). The central issue before the court was whether Macharg's service as a "temporary draftsman" from 24th September 1868 to 10th September 1872 should be considered when determining his entitlement to superannuation. The court had to interpret the definition of "officer" in the Civil Service Act 1884 (N.S.W.) to decide if this period qualified as service within the Civil Service. The Government of New South Wales argued that Macharg was not an officer during this period and thus his service should not be counted.

The court examined the interpretation clause in the Civil Service Act 1884, which defined "Civil Service" as the body of persons appointed to permanent salaried offices. It also defined "officer" as any person holding office in the Civil Service, excluding those employed temporarily. The court found that the Act recognized officers holding office before its enactment and that the term "persons employed temporarily" referred to those who could not be admitted to the Service until they passed the prescribed examination. The court concluded that Macharg's employment as a draftsman, though temporary, was in a permanent salaried office, and thus he was an officer within the meaning of the Act. Therefore, the court held that his service during this period should be taken into account in computing his superannuation allowance. The appeal was dismissed, and Macharg was entitled to the superannuation allowance based on the inclusion of his temporary service.

Orders