AMEC Engineering Pty Ltd v Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing & Allied Services Union of Australia [2003] FCA 28

AMEC Engineering Pty Ltd v Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing & Allied Services Union of Australia [2003] FCA 28

Interim injunctive relief was warranted because affidavit evidence disclosed a serious question to be tried that the picketing involved actionable obstruction or besetting, a serious question that the respondent unions were involved through organisers, delegates and the circumstances leading to the picket, and the balance of convenience favoured temporary restraint because the picket had prevented and was likely to continue preventing the applicant from conducting its business and was likely to cause loss to Melbourne Water.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
28 January 2003
Procedural Posture
Application for Declaration and Injunctions Concerning Industrial Action and Picketing / Interim Relief Pending Interlocutory Relief Hearing
Outcome
Interim injunction granted; application for interlocutory relief adjourned; costs reserved.
Legal Topics
['protected Industrial Action' 'picketing' 'obstruction and Besetting' 'interim Injunction' 'serious Question to Be Tried' 'balance of Convenience']
['industrial Law' 'injunctions'] ['protected Industrial Action' 'picketing' 'obstruction and Besetting' 'interim Injunction' 'serious Question to Be Tried' 'balance of Convenience']

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 Declaration and Injunctions Concerning Industrial Action and Picketing / Interim Relief Pending Interlocutory Relief Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether there was a serious question to be tried as to whether the activity at the picket line was actionable rather than protected action.' 'Whether there was a serious question to be tried as to whether the respondent unions were involved in the aspects of the picketing alleged to be actionable.' 'Whether the balance of convenience favoured temporary injunctive relief restraining interference with access to and egress from the work site.']

Ratio Decidendi

Interim injunctive relief was warranted because affidavit evidence disclosed a serious question to be tried that the picketing involved actionable obstruction or besetting, a serious question that the respondent unions were involved through organisers, delegates and the circumstances leading to the picket, and the balance of convenience favoured temporary restraint because the picket had prevented and was likely to continue preventing the applicant from conducting its business and was likely to cause loss to Melbourne Water.

Court Disposition

Interim injunction granted; application for interlocutory relief adjourned; costs reserved.

Orders

  • ["The respondents and each of them, whether by their officers, servants or agents or howsoever otherwise, be restrained until 4.15 pm on Monday 3 February from preventing, hindering or interfering with free access to and free egress from the applicant's work site at Melbourne Water Eastern Treatment Plant, Thompson...