The AWU-FIME Amalgamated Union v. The Honourable Deputy President Acton (a member of the Australian Industrial Relations Commission), Construction, Forestry, Mining & Energy Union and Media Entertainment & Arts Alliance & Entertainment Industry Employers' Association & ors v. The Honourable Deputy President Acton (a member of the Australian Industrial Relations Commission), Construction, Forestry, Mining & Energy Union and Media Entertainment & Arts Alliance [1994] IRCA 36

The AWU-FIME Amalgamated Union v. The Honourable Deputy President Acton (a member of the Australian Industrial Relations Commission), Construction, Forestry, Mining & Energy Union and Media Entertainment & Arts Alliance & Entertainment Industry Employers' Association & ors v. The Honourable Deputy President Acton (a member of the Australian Industrial Relations Commission), Construction, Forestry, Mining & Energy Union and Media Entertainment & Arts Alliance [1994] IRCA 36

Deputy President Acton had disclosed the whole of her present recollection of the ACTU meetings, and a reasonable observer would not apprehend that she would be influenced by statements whose content she no longer remembered. The fairness and reasonableness of the ACTU officers' 1992 process was not a live issue for her determination because AWU-FIME had no notice of that process and no weight could properly be given to the ACTU officers' decision against AWU-FIME. Her earlier ACTU involvement was therefore irrelevant to the issues she had to decide and did not create a reasonable apprehension of bias.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
14 September 1994
Procedural Posture
Applications for Writs of Prohibition and Certiorari Alleging Apprehended Bias in Proceedings Before the Australian Industrial Relations Commission / Applications Filed in the High Court of Australia, Remitted to the Industrial Relations Court of Australia Under S. 44 of the Judiciary Act 1903 and Heard Together
Outcome
Both applications dismissed.
Legal Topics
['apprehended Bias' 'natural Justice' 'australian Industrial Relations Commission' 'union Coverage and Demarcation Dispute' 'disclosure of Independent Knowledge by Tribunal Member']
['industrial Law' 'administrative Law' 'practice and Procedure'] ['apprehended Bias' 'natural Justice' 'australian Industrial Relations Commission' 'union Coverage and Demarcation Dispute' 'disclosure of Independent Knowledge by Tribunal Member']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Applications for Writs of Prohibition and Certiorari Alleging Apprehended Bias in Proceedings Before the Australian Industrial Relations Commission / Applications Filed in the High Court of Australia, Remitted to the Industrial Relations Court of Australia Under S. 44 of the Judiciary Act 1903 and Heard Together

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether Deputy President Acton's prior involvement as an ACTU officer in one or two meetings concerning union coverage in the exhibition industry gave rise to a reasonable apprehension of bias." 'Whether failure to disclose the content of statements made by BWIU and ATAEA at those ACTU meetings required disqualification.' "Whether AWU-FIME could rely on Deputy President Acton's alleged involvement in the ACTU process where AWU-FIME wished to challenge the fairness and reasonableness of that process." 'Whether the applicants in NI 294 of 1994 had waived any right to seek disqualification.']

Ratio Decidendi

Deputy President Acton had disclosed the whole of her present recollection of the ACTU meetings, and a reasonable observer would not apprehend that she would be influenced by statements whose content she no longer remembered. The fairness and reasonableness of the ACTU officers' 1992 process was not a live issue for her determination because AWU-FIME had no notice of that process and no weight could properly be given to the ACTU officers' decision against AWU-FIME. Her earlier ACTU involvement was therefore irrelevant to the issues she had to decide and did not create a reasonable apprehension of bias.

Court Disposition

Both applications dismissed.

Orders

  • ['Each application will be dismissed.']