THE RIGHT OF APPEAL

Hawke's Bay Herald-Tribune, Volume 81, Issue 22, 19 October 1937, Page 7

THE RIGHT OF APPEAL

Change Needed in Present Induttrial Acts N0 REDRESS IN BUREAUCRACY The fact that a civil claim, cither for money or on some point of principle involved, could be tahen to the Supreme Courtt or even to the Court.of Appeal, but that a man's livelihcod couid be taken away from him and his only recourse would be an appeal^ to the Minigter of the Crown. was pointed out by Mr W. E. Bate, at the meeting of the Hastings Chamber of Commerce last evening. Before the meeting at the time was a remit, to be submitted to the annuaJi conference of the Associated Cbambers next month. for consideration, dealing with the right of appeal and strongly protesting again'st the denial of this right in legislative enactments such as the Industrial Efficiency Act, the Prevention of Profiteering Act and the Transporfc Licensing Act. "Under the Industrial Efficiency Act the Government has enormous powers," said Mr Bate. "As we become more acquainted with its application we' sce it extended in many ways by Orders-in-Council , and we find a great number of industries being directed under it. "No doubt the scheme of the Act was BQund, the idea being to prevent economic waste, but where a man s livelihood, is at' stake, and he can he refused the right to earn his living m the partieular manner in which he has specially adapted himseli, by tbe refusal of a licence by some bureaucra^c authority. then he should have some redress, or rights," he said. It was admitted ,that there was the right to appeal to the Minister, but Mr Bate said that it was not intended that an appeal to the Minister of the Crown should be the same as an appeal to the Judicial Courts of Justice. "After all, the Minister is not in office all the time and is really a political vessel," he said. Mr Bate pointed out that if a man olaimed £25 from another, or sought a ruling on any principle involved in a trnnsaction, he could call upon the best brains of the legal fraternity to handle his claims and the point of issue could be taken to the highest Courts Of the land. "Yct, where a man's livelihood3 and even his whole carfier, is at stake it seems that he is entirely in the liands of the Minister," said Mr Bate. The opinion was expressed by^ Mr Bate that opportunity should be given for the applicant whose licence had been, or was likely to be refused, to give evidence, on oath and to hear the evidence of w^tnesses, also on oath, and to have the right to crossexamine those witnesses. As it was at present all that could be done was to make 6ubmissions to the Minister without any knowledge of the objections that had been raised. _ "There are many cases infinitely more serious than some of those that conie daily before the Courts and it is manifestly unsatisfactory that the right of appeal in those cases is so iuadequate," declared Mr Bate. Support was accorded the remit, which presses for the reinstatement of the right of appeal in the statutes mentioned and for its allowance in any future enactments.