FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
INDUSTRIAL LAW - registered organisation - rules - rule to show cause - whether rule to show cause should be made absolute or discharged.
Workplace Relations Act 1996 (Cth), s 209
BRIAN JOHN DALEY v S. POHLE, E. PIAZZA, R. GRAY, B. ROGERS, I. UNAL, L. MANCINO, A. MAMMONE, O. LOPEZ, M. KING, P. KELLY
VG 204 of 1998
MARSHALL J
MELBOURNE
28 MAY 1998
|
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA |
|
|
BETWEEN: |
BRIAN JOHN DALEY Applicant
|
|
|
AND: |
S. POHLE, E. PIAZZA, R. GRAY, B. ROGERS, I. UNAL, L. MANCINO, A. MAMMONE, O. LOPEZ, M. KING, P. KELLY RESPONDENTS
|
|
|
DATE OF ORDER: |
||
|
WHERE MADE: |
||
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1. The rule to show cause granted by North J on 20 May 1998 be discharged.
Note: Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.
|
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA |
|
|
BETWEEN: |
Applicant
|
|
AND: |
S. POHLE, E. PIAZZA, R. GRAY, B. ROGERS, I. UNAL, L. MANCINO, A. MAMMONE, O. LOPEZ, M. KING, P. KELLY RESPONDENTS |
|
JUDGE(S): |
|
|
DATE: |
|
|
PLACE: |
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
On 20 May 1998 North J granted a rule to show cause in this matter pursuant to s 209 of the Workplace Relations Act 1996 (Cth)(“the Act”). The rule to show cause was returnable on 25, 26 and 28 May 1998 . It was heard together with two other related proceedings. One such proceeding was an election inquiry in which I have today delivered a separate judgment. See In The Matter of an Inquiry Relating to An Election in the Victorian Baking Section of the Miscellaneous Workers Division of The Australian Liquor Hospitality and Miscellaneous Workers Union (Marshall J, unreported, 28 May 1998). The other proceeding was an application for a ballot pursuant to Division 7A of Part IX of the Act. These reasons deal only with the s 209 application.
In the election inquiry I declined to declare void the election of Mr Gray as Secretary-Treasurer of the Baking Section of the Victorian Branch of the Miscellaneous Workers Division of the Australian Liquor Hospitality and Miscellaneous Workers Union. I further declined to declare void acts taken by Mr Gray with respect to the application for a ballot pursuant to Division 7A of Part IX of the Act. No practical consequences arise if the Court makes the rule to show cause absolute in circumstances where Mr Gray’s attendance at Baking Section committee of management meetings referred to in the rule cannot be impugned. Consequently, in those circumstances it is appropriate, as is acknowledged by both counsel, to order that the rule to show cause in this matter granted by North J on 20 May 1998 be discharged.
The order of the court is that the rule to show cause granted by North J on 20 May 1998 be discharged.
|
I certify that this and the preceding one (1) pages are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Honourable Justice Marshall |
Associate:
Dated: 28 May 1998
|
Counsel for the Applicant: |
Mr Robert Hinkley |
|
|
|
|
Solicitor for the Applicant: |
Ryan Carlisle Thomas |
|
|
|
|
Counsel for the Respondents: |
Mr Herman Borenstein |
|
|
|
|
Solicitor for the Respondents: |
Howie & Maher |
|
|
|
|
Date of Hearing: |
25, 26 & 28 May 1998 |
|
|
|
|
Date of Judgment: |
28 May 1998 (ex-tempore) |
