Testing Their Jurisdiction

N.G. District Courts

From Our Own Correspondent.

Rabaul, Nov. 14.

A CASE which has caused considerable interest in the Territory is that in which the jurisdiction of the District Court, Rabaul, was tested. The action arose out of a charge under the Com monwealth Air Navigation Act.

Counsel for the defence (Mr. R. Ollerenshaw) contended that offences under the Air Navigation Act could not be tried before the District Court, as the Regula tions are legislation of the Commonwealth and therefore only courts vested with Federal jurisdiction were capable of try ing such cases. A further contention was that the only laws in the Territory were the Ordinances of the Territory and that an Act, before becoming law, must be proclaimed; also that the Air Navigation Act is not one of the laws included in the schedule of laws for adoption in the Territory.

The Crown Law Officer (Mr. Gerald Hogan, M.L.C.), in showing cause, pointed out that Australia had been granted a Mandate over the former German posses sion and was given authority in that Mandate to administer the Territory as an integral part of the Commonwealth, which permitted the Commonwealth to apply the laws of the Commonwealth to the Territory, subject to such local modi fications as circumstances might require.

In his summing-up, His Honour the Chief Judge ruled that the Air Navigation Regulations are in force here, and that the Territory courts have jurisdiction in the case of Commonwealth Acts applied to the Territory or expressed to extend here; also that District Courts have juris diction to hear and determine offences against the Commonwealth Acts or Regu lations which extend to the Territory, and which are punishable on summary con viction.