Belan v National Union of Workers [2001] FCA 724

Belan v National Union of Workers [2001] FCA 724

The appeal succeeded only in relation to the no comment resolution. Clause 6 of the 202 agreement referred to the State Union only, not the New South Wales Branch of the Organisation, and no term preventing the Organisation from later amending rule 71 could be implied. The June 1999 rule amendments and the Central Branch amendments were therefore valid and were not shown to be oppressive, unreasonable or unjust. Rule 46(D) did not apply to allocations to the Central Branch under rule 37 because the allocation power applied notwithstanding any other rule. The no comment resolution was invalid because its blanket prohibition on any comment to anybody about the specified litigation went too...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
15 June 2001
Procedural Posture
Industrial Law; Amended Rule to Show Cause Seeking Relief Under Ss 208 and 209 of the Workplace Relations Act 1996 (cth) and Accrued Jurisdiction / Appeal From a Judgment of Moore J Given on 15 December 2000
Outcome
Appeal upheld in part and otherwise dismissed.
Legal Topics
['interpretation of Agreement Between State Registered Union and Federal Organisation' 'implied Terms Limiting Rule Amendment Power' 'validity of Union Rule Amendments' 'oppressive, Unreasonable or Unjust Rules' 'validity of National Committee of Management Resolutions' 'protected Action and Bargaining Periods Under the Workplace Relations Act 1996 (cth)']
['industrial Law'] ['interpretation of Agreement Between State Registered Union and Federal Organisation' 'implied Terms Limiting Rule Amendment Power' 'validity of Union Rule Amendments' 'oppressive, Unreasonable or Unjust Rules' 'validity of National Committee of Management Resolutions' 'protected Action and Bargaining Periods Under the Workplace Relations Act 1996 (cth)']

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

Industrial Law; Amended Rule to Show Cause Seeking Relief Under Ss 208 and 209 of the Workplace Relations Act 1996 (cth) and Accrued Jurisdiction / Appeal From a Judgment of Moore J Given on 15 December 2000

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether clause 6 of the 202 agreement conferred autonomy on the New South Wales Branch of the Organisation, rather than only on the State Union.' 'Whether a term should be implied into the 202 agreement preventing amendment or deletion of rule 71 during the currency of the agreement.' 'Whether the June 1999 amendments deleting parts of rule 71 were invalid.' "Whether the rule changes creating and amending the Central Branch made the Organisation's rules oppressive, unreasonable or unjust under s 196(c) of the Workplace Relations Act 1996 (Cth)." 'Whether rule 46(D) applied to allocations of members to the Central Branch under rule 37.' 'Whether the 30 November 1998 no comment resolution was beyond power or invalid.' 'Whether the resolutions concerning bargaining periods, protected action and enterprise bargaining were invalid because rule 53A authorised the New South Wales Branch Committee of Management or Branch Secretary to initiate bargaining periods or apply for certification of agreements.']

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal succeeded only in relation to the no comment resolution. Clause 6 of the 202 agreement referred to the State Union only, not the New South Wales Branch of the Organisation, and no term preventing the Organisation from later amending rule 71 could be implied. The June 1999 rule amendments and the Central Branch amendments were therefore valid and were not shown to be oppressive, unreasonable or unjust. Rule 46(D) did not apply to allocations to the Central Branch under rule 37 because the allocation power applied notwithstanding any other rule. The no comment resolution was invalid because its blanket prohibition on any comment to anybody about the specified litigation went too...

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld in part and otherwise dismissed.

Orders

  • ['The appeal be upheld in part.' 'The orders made by Moore J on 15 December 2000 be varied by omitting orders 3 and 4 and substituting new orders that the respondents perform and observe the rules of the National Union of Workers by treating as null and void and of no effect the resolution of the National Committee...