HC Deb 21 May 1935 vol 302 c987

5.9 p.m.


I beg to move, in page 119, line 40, to leave out from "law," to the end of the Sub section, and to insert: has been wrongly decided, being a question which concerns the interpretation of this Act or of an Order in Council made there under or the extent of the legislative or executive authority vested in the Federation by virtue of the Instrument of Accession of that State, or arises under an agreement made under Part VI of this Act in relation to the administration in that State of a law of the Federal Legislature.? This is very similar to the last Amendment I moved. It arises on Clause 205, which is dealing with the appellate jurisdiction of the Federal Court on an appeal from a High Court of a Federated State. As the House will remember, appeals were allowed from the High Courts in the Federated States to the Federal Court, broadly speaking, on questions as to the interpretation of the Constitution Act, or Orders made under it. The general words, as originally drafted, are just as they were in Clause 202, and the House will see that the words which we propose to insert, where they are not split up in to sub-paragraphs, are in substance and fact the same as the words which I explained just now.

Amendment agreed to.