Ralan St Leonards Pty Ltd v Construction, Forestry, Mining & Energy Union [2014] FCA 431

Ralan St Leonards Pty Ltd v Construction, Forestry, Mining & Energy Union [2014] FCA 431

There was a serious question to be tried that the CFMEU's conduct had crossed the line from lawful protest into unlawful obstruction or besetting by impeding or preventing deliveries and exposing workers to intimidation and abuse so as to impede free access to the site; there was a real risk that the conduct would continue unless restrained, the balance of convenience was unquestionably in favour of relief, and no persuasive discretionary reason justified declining relief.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
01 May 2014
Procedural Posture
Industrial Law Proceeding Concerning Pickets and Protests and Alleged Contravention of S 45 D of the Competition and Consumer Act 2010 / Interlocutory Application for Injunctive Relief Against the First Respondent
Outcome
Interlocutory injunctive relief granted against the First Respondent; costs reserved; matter stood over.
Legal Topics
['pickets and Protests' 'unlawful Obstruction and Besetting' 'interlocutory Injunction' 'section 45 D of the Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (cth)']
['industrial Law' 'competition and Consumer Law' 'equity'] ['pickets and Protests' 'unlawful Obstruction and Besetting' 'interlocutory Injunction' 'section 45 D of the Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (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 Proceeding Concerning Pickets and Protests and Alleged Contravention of S 45 D of the Competition and Consumer Act 2010 / Interlocutory Application for Injunctive Relief Against the First Respondent

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether there was a serious question to be tried that the CFMEU's conduct went beyond lawful protest and involved unlawful hindering, obstruction or besetting of access to the St Leonards construction site." 'Whether the balance of convenience favoured granting interlocutory injunctive relief.' 'Whether any discretionary reason existed to decline interlocutory relief.']

Ratio Decidendi

There was a serious question to be tried that the CFMEU's conduct had crossed the line from lawful protest into unlawful obstruction or besetting by impeding or preventing deliveries and exposing workers to intimidation and abuse so as to impede free access to the site; there was a real risk that the conduct would continue unless restrained, the balance of convenience was unquestionably in favour of relief, and no persuasive discretionary reason justified declining relief.

Court Disposition

Interlocutory injunctive relief granted against the First Respondent; costs reserved; matter stood over.

Orders

  • ["Until further order, the First Respondent is restrained by its servants or agents from organising, continuing to organise, or threatening to organise, or being otherwise involved in any physical obstruction, or any physical impediment to the free movement of goods or people, to and from the First Applicant's...