R v Kirby; Ex parte Boilermakers' Society of Australia
| R v Kirby; Ex parte Boilermakers' Society of Australia | |
|---|---|
| Court | High Court of Australia |
| Full case name | The Queen against Kirby and Others; Ex parte Boilermakers' Society of Australia |
| Decided | 2 March 1956 |
| Citations | [1956] HCA 10, (1956) 94 CLR 254 |
| Case history | |
| Prior actions | |
| Court membership | |
| Judges sitting |
|
| Case opinions | |
| The judicial power of the Commonwealth cannot be vested in a tribunal that also exercises non-judicial functions (by Dixon, McTiernan, Fullagar and Kitto; Williams and Webb dissenting) | |
| Attorney-General (Cth) v The Queen | |
|---|---|
| Court | Judicial Committee of the Privy Council |
| Decided | 19 March 1957 |
| Citations | [1957] UKPC 4, [1957] AC 288; [1957] UKPCHCA 1, (1957) 95 CLR 529 |
| Court membership | |
| Judges sitting | |
.svg){kind=link}
R v Kirby; Ex parte Boilermakers' Society of Australia, known as the Boilermakers' Case, was a 1956 decision of the High Court of Australia which considered the powers of the Commonwealth Court of Conciliation and Arbitration to punish the Boilermakers' Society of Australia, a union which had disobeyed the orders of that court in relation to an industrial dispute between boilermakers and their employer body, the Metal Trades Employers' Association.
The High Court held that the judicial power of the Commonwealth could not be vested in a tribunal that also exercised non-judicial functions. It is a major case dealing with the separation of powers in Australian law.