Williams v Hursey [1959] HCA 51

Williams v Hursey [1959] HCA 51

A federally registered industrial organization may, if so authorized by its registered rules, lawfully impose a compulsory political levy, notwithstanding contrary State law, because its federal legal personality and powers derive from Commonwealth law, not State law. The Hobart branch, having no separate legal identity, could not be sued eo nomine. The acts of mass picketing and obstruction constituted an actionable tortious conspiracy; damages were payable but should be reduced in the circumstances. Preference in employment persisted only while the relevant Port Order was in force; after revocation, no such right subsisted.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal (and Removal of Proceedings) From the Supreme Court of Tasmania / High Court of Australia Judgment After Hearing Three Related Matters
Outcome
Appeals in the first two actions allowed; third action (Winch and Others v The Australian Stevedoring Industry Authority and Others) appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
['union Powers and Political Levies' 'ultra Vires of Union Powers' 'members’ Rights and Expulsion' 'tortious Conspiracy' 'preference in Industrial Employment' 'jurisdiction of Courts Over Industrial Organizations']
['industrial Law' 'trade Union Law' 'constitutional Law' 'torts'] ['union Powers and Political Levies' 'ultra Vires of Union Powers' 'members’ Rights and Expulsion' 'tortious Conspiracy' 'preference in Industrial Employment' 'jurisdiction of Courts Over Industrial Organizations']

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

Civil Appeal (and Removal of Proceedings) From the Supreme Court of Tasmania / High Court of Australia Judgment After Hearing Three Related Matters

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether a compulsory political levy imposed by a union branch was valid under its rules and the law' 'Whether federal registration of a union under the Conciliation and Arbitration Act displaced State law limits upon the purposes for which a union could levy members' 'Whether the plaintiffs ceased to be members of the Federation for refusing to pay a political levy' 'Whether acts of mass picketing preventing employment amounted to tortious conspiracy or other legal wrongs' 'Whether preference in employment for union members existed after certain statutory changes' 'Whether damages awarded were correct in quantum']

Ratio Decidendi

A federally registered industrial organization may, if so authorized by its registered rules, lawfully impose a compulsory political levy, notwithstanding contrary State law, because its federal legal personality and powers derive from Commonwealth law, not State law. The Hobart branch, having no separate legal identity, could not be sued eo nomine. The acts of mass picketing and obstruction constituted an actionable tortious conspiracy; damages were payable but should be reduced in the circumstances. Preference in employment persisted only while the relevant Port Order was in force; after revocation, no such right subsisted.

Court Disposition

Appeals in the first two actions allowed; third action (Winch and Others v The Australian Stevedoring Industry Authority and Others) appeal dismissed

Orders

  • ['Order that in Action No. 1363 of 1957, appeal allowed with costs, discharge judgment of Supreme Court of Tasmania, action dismissed with costs.' 'Order that in Action No. 78 of 1958, appeal allowed, respondents to pay one half appellants’ costs of appeal; discharge declarations that plaintiffs were at all material...