Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

A FLAW IN THE ACT.

READY-MADE A WAKDS.; - A recent decision of Mr.-: Justice Sim in the Arbitration Court at Auckland ' ina.kes ono clause of the Arbitration. Aot entirely inoperative. Tho section in question Was apparently drawn to. permit of . parties .to a, dispute settling their differences without reference to tho Court. The .clause says . .in effect. that ; where the assessors for both parties in the Conciliation Council agree, ..their recommendations shall bo filed- with tho , Ulerk of Awards, who shall then notify nil the interested parties, and if none Df the parties give notice of disagreement, the recommendation' shall "operate and be enforceable in. the same manner aa an award duly executed and filed by tho parties." Mr. Justice Sim has held that such an award is. a mere ; nullity. The effect of thp decision is very important in 6ome districts, though not in Wellington, an'd also very peculiar. Many cases have been settled in Auckland by thoso "awards," which aro not now'enforceable. The only instance near Wellington is at Blenheim, where a building trade dispute was settled in • this way. Now it will be necessary, in order' to make an award -which shallbe valid, for the parties to disagree in some particular before the Conciliation Council, in order that the case may go on to the Court. The Act provides for industrial agreements, instruments executed Tjy all the parties, being enforceable, but apparently the recommendations of the assessors in .'the '.Conciliation Council ara not so enforceable. Another clause in the Act eays:—"The recommendation of the council shall in no case haveyiny binding force or effect, but shall operate merely as a suggestion for the amicable settlement of the dispute by mutual agreement, and as a public " announcement' 'of tho opinion of the council as to the meritsof the dispute." , This sub-section lias never been repealed, and it seems to make it impossible fot the Court to take any account of the recommendations'of the council, even if the evident intention of the Act was that it should do so.

Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/DOM19130426.2.31

Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka

Dominion, Volume 6, Issue 1734, 26 April 1913, Page 5

Word count
Tapeke kupu
340

A FLAW IN THE ACT. Dominion, Volume 6, Issue 1734, 26 April 1913, Page 5

A FLAW IN THE ACT. Dominion, Volume 6, Issue 1734, 26 April 1913, Page 5

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert