NAYLOR CASE AGAIN

Timaru Herald, Volume CXXXIX, Issue 20051, 7 March 1935, Page 9

NAYLOR CASE AGAIN

CLUBS APPEAL TO PRIVY COUNCIL

Onlted press Association—By Eleetrlo Telegraph—Copyright (Received March 6, 9 p.m.) SYDNEY, March 6. The Full Court granted an application on behalf of the Australian Jockey Club for leave to appeal to the Privy Council against the majority decision of the Full Court on December 20, granting an injunction restraining the club from preventing Rufus Ilaylor from entering the Randwick racecourse. The Full Bench of the Supreme Court on December 20 allowed an appeal by Rufe Naylor against the Australian Jockey Club, Mr Justice Harvey dissenting, and dismissed the appeal by the Australian Jockey Club against Naylor. This meant that Naylor had the right to enter Randwick racecourse. Mr Justice Davidson declared that the Jockey Club by-law was too widely expressed. Any person might be held to be not desirable for personal or any reasons, as to which the Jockey Club Committee would not be bound to state more than their general opinion as to undesirability. Previously on May 31 Mr Justice Street, in the Equity Court, had dismissed Naylor’s application for an interim injunction, restraining the Australan Jockey Club from actng under by-law nine, which empowered the club to exclude from the racecourse, persons within its discretion deemed undesirable. The Judge said the words of this by-law were obviously meant “undesirable.” from the point of view of the management of horse racing on Randwick racecourse as a sport. The legislature had invested the Australian Jockey Club with power for making bylaws for the general management and control of the lands comprising the racecourse and it was apparent that the legislature intended that the Australian Jockey Club should have the right of saying what class of person should not enter a racecourse. However, the committee should, before acting upon this by-law, give the person involved an opportunity of being heard.