John David Sutton, the Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union and Ian Gordon Sharp, the State of Victoria [1994] IRCA 90

John David Sutton, the Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union and Ian Gordon Sharp, the State of Victoria [1994] IRCA 90

Leave to appeal was refused because the proposed appeal raised no general question of law or principle and, given the allegations concerning possible invalidity in the internal management or administration of the organisation, it could not be said at this stage that the Court lacked jurisdiction under s.258 or that an appeal against the refusal to dismiss the proceeding would have any substantial prospect of success.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
01 November 1994
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Appeal Against Interlocutory Order Refusing to Summarily Dismiss an Application for Want of Jurisdiction / Leave to Appeal From Interlocutory Order
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
['leave to Appeal' 'interlocutory Order' 'want of Jurisdiction' 'industrial Organisation Management and Administration' 'associated Jurisdiction']
['industrial Relations' 'civil Procedure' 'jurisdiction' 'constitutional Law'] ['leave to Appeal' 'interlocutory Order' 'want of Jurisdiction' 'industrial Organisation Management and Administration' 'associated Jurisdiction']

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

Application for Leave to Appeal Against Interlocutory Order Refusing to Summarily Dismiss an Application for Want of Jurisdiction / Leave to Appeal From Interlocutory Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether leave should be granted to appeal against the interlocutory order refusing to dismiss the proceeding for want of jurisdiction.' 'Whether the proposed appeal raised any general question of law or principle concerning s.258 of the Industrial Relations Act 1988.' 'Whether, at least at this stage, there was a serious question as to invalidity in aspects of the internal management or administration of the organisation sufficient to enliven jurisdiction under s.258.' 'Whether the proposed appeal would enjoy a substantial prospect of success.']

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to appeal was refused because the proposed appeal raised no general question of law or principle and, given the allegations concerning possible invalidity in the internal management or administration of the organisation, it could not be said at this stage that the Court lacked jurisdiction under s.258 or that an appeal against the refusal to dismiss the proceeding would have any substantial prospect of success.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • ['The application for leave to appeal filed by the first and second respondents, Ian Gordon Sharp and the State of Victoria, be refused.']