Bond v Commonwealth

Chief Justice Griffith, held that the Constitution did grant rights, which in Bond's case was a right to continued employment and receive equivalent wages. Regarding the Commonwealth's case – the Court held that in the face of Bond's constitutional right, whether sec. 78(1) of the Public Service Act,^[5] was or was not defensible in a court became irrelevant and the judgment ruled it unnecessary to consider the question altogether.

The intention apparent in the Constitution,^[4] was that public servants who transferred to the Commonwealth would continue to receive the same benefits they received from the States. The High Court's decision in Deakin v Webb,^[6] finding that Commonwealth officials and public servants were not liable to pay State income tax, increased their effective salary. Higgins KC who appeared in the High Court on behalf of Alfred Deakin wrote in 1905 that "The man in the street is startled and puzzled. He sees a public official, enjoying a regular salary in the postal department, paying the Victorian income-tax until federation, and then suddenly exempted from the tax because the post-office has passed over to federal control."^[7] The situation was resolved in 1907 by the Commonwealth Parliament enacting legislation that permitted the States to tax the income of a Commonwealth officer.^[8][9]