Constitutional conventions High Court of Australia

sir samuel griffith, first chief justice of australia

the constitutional conventions of 1890s, met draft australian constitution, raised idea of federal supreme court. initial proposals @ conference in melbourne in february 1890 led convention in sydney in march , april 1891, produced draft constitution. draft included creation of supreme court of australia, not interpret constitution, united states supreme court, court of appeal state supreme courts. draft removed appeals privy council, allowing them if british monarch gave leave appeal , not allowing appeals @ in constitutional matters.

this draft largely work of sir samuel griffith, premier of queensland, later chief justice of queensland , first chief justice of australia. other significant contributors judicial clauses in draft included attorney-general of tasmania andrew inglis clark, had prepared own constitution prior convention. inglis clark s significant contribution give court own constitutional authority, ensuring separation of powers; original formulation griffith, edmund barton , charles kingston provided parliament establish court.

andrew inglis clark, prominent contributor clauses high court in constitution of australia.

at later conventions, in adelaide in 1897, in sydney later same year , in melbourne in 1898, there changes earlier draft. in adelaide, name of court changed supreme court of australia high court of australia. many people opposed new court replacing privy council: many large businesses, particularly subsidiaries of british companies or regularly traded united kingdom, preferred business reasons keep colonies under unified jurisdiction of british courts, , petitioned conventions effect. other arguments posited against removing privy council appeals australian judges of poorer quality english ones, , without council s oversight, law in colonies risked becoming different english law. politicians, such sir george dibbs, supported petitioners, others, including alfred deakin, supported design of court was. inglis clark took view possibility of divergence thing, law adapt appropriately australian circumstances. despite debate, portions of draft dealing court remained largely unchanged, delegates focused on different matters.

after draft had been approved electors of colonies, taken london in 1899, assent of british imperial parliament. issue of privy council appeals remained sticking point number of australian , british politicians, including secretary of state colonies, joseph chamberlain, chief justice of south australia, sir samuel way, , chief justice of queensland, sir samuel griffith. indeed, in october 1899, griffith made representations chamberlain soliciting suggestions british ministers alterations draft, , offering alterations of own. indeed, such effect of these , other representations chamberlain called delegates colonies come london assist approval process, view approving alterations british government might see fit make; delegates sent, including deakin, barton , charles kingston, although under instructions never agree changes.

after intense lobbying both in australia , in united kingdom, imperial parliament approved draft constitution, albeit altered section 74, represented compromise between 2 sides: there general right of appeal high court privy council, except parliament of australia able make laws restricting avenue, , appeals in inter se matters (matters concerning boundary between , limits of powers of commonwealth , powers of states) not of right, had certified high court.