§
Lords Amendment: In page 131, line 3, at the end, insert:
(2) No report shall be made under this section save in accordance with an opinion delivered in open court with the concurrence of a majority of the judges present at the hearing of the case, but nothing in this sub-section shall be deemed to prevent a judge who does not concur from delivering a dissenting opinion.
§ 6.38 p.m.
§ The ATTORNEY-GENERALI beg to move, "That this House doth agree with the Lords in the said Amendment."
This Clause gives the Governor-General power to consult the Federal Court. There is an analogous provision in our own law, in Section 4 of the Judicial Committee Act, which enables His Majesty to have the advice of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council. The Clause as it left this House left two matters open, first, the question whether the advice must be reported publicly to the Governor-General, in response to his request, and, secondly, whether any dissenting opinion might be given. In the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council it is not the practice for more than one 2550 opinion to be given. Therefore, if there is any dissent among the members of the Board that dissent is not known. Obviously, no reason which may appeal to any dissenting member of the tribunal can be made public. It is proposed to add the provision in this Amendment to make it plain that no report shall be made under this Section save in accordance with an opinion which shall be delivered in open court. It is also provided by this new Sub-section that a judge who dissents may deliver a dissenting opinion. It is obviously desirable in these circumstances that the Governor-General shall be aware of the way in which certain arguments have appealed to members of the Federal Court and that he shall have the advantage of knowing the views which have been taken by the dissenting minority of the court as well as by the majority.
§ Subsequent Lords Amendments to page 136, line 35, agreed to.
§ Lords Amendment: In page 137, line 21, at the end, insert: