Note: Where available, the PDF/Word icon below is provided to view the complete and fully formatted document
 Download Full Day's HansardDownload Full Day's Hansard    View Or Save XMLView/Save XML

Previous Fragment    Next Fragment
Thursday, 5 July 1906


Mr JOSEPH COOK (PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES) - The Attorney-General's statement is a perfectly fair one from the point of view from which he puts it : but. as he said, in answer to my interjection, that he preferred to take one thing at a time, I want to point out that there is one respect in which this provision is decidedly unfair. While the burden is upon those who start the prosecution, or the inquiry to prove against the defendant all the thingsmen- tioned by the Attomey-General, vet the Billprovides that while those processes are going on theAttornev-General may holdup thebusiness of the defendant. Under clause 10, the Attorney-General, or any person authorized by him, may institute proceedings to restrain by injunction, not the commission of any breach merely, but the continuance of any breach.


Mr Isaacs - The Attorney-General has no power to deal with anything himself. He has only power to apply to the Court, and the Court will require all these things to be proved. It is not a Ministerial act. It is an application to the Court. These things would have to be proved just the same, although there is no criminal liability under the clause referred to.


Mr Henry Willis - But the industry of the defendant will be held up in the meantime.







Suggest corrections