ANL Container Line Pty Limited v Maritime Union of Australia [1999] FCA 1882

ANL Container Line Pty Limited v Maritime Union of Australia [1999] FCA 1882

There was sufficient material to consider that members of the crew who refused to sail, identified as union members, had acted in concert and substantially hindered the applicant’s trade. The presumption under s 45DC applied. The balance of convenience favoured granting an interlocutory injunction restraining the union’s officers, employees or agents from engaging in such conduct.

Parties
Applicant: ANL Container Line Pty Limited; First Respondent: Maritime Union of Australia; Second Respondent: Peter John Norrie; Third Respondent: Michael David Hughes; Fourth Respondent: John Charles Hartley; Fifth Respondent: Gert Bergvall; Sixth Respondent: Jason Ross Evans; Seventh Respondent: Paul Charity; Eighth Respondent: Michael Barber; Ninth Respondent: Ross Eric Goyen; Tenth Respondent: David Fitzgibbon
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
09 September 1999
Procedural Posture
Interlocutory Application / Interlocutory/injunction Hearing
Outcome
Interlocutory injunction granted
Legal Topics
Interlocutory Injunction, Trade Practices Act S 45 DB, Secondary Boycotts, Union Conduct
Trade Practices Industrial Law Interlocutory Injunction Trade Practices Act S 45 DB Secondary Boycotts Union Conduct

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 3 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

ANL Container Line Pty Limited

Applicant

Maritime Union of Australia

First Respondent

Peter John Norrie

Second Respondent

Michael David Hughes

Third Respondent

John Charles Hartley

Fourth Respondent

Gert Bergvall

Fifth Respondent

Jason Ross Evans

Sixth Respondent

Paul Charity

Seventh Respondent

Michael Barber

Eighth Respondent

Ross Eric Goyen

Ninth Respondent

David Fitzgibbon

Tenth Respondent

Procedural Posture

Interlocutory Application / Interlocutory/injunction Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether interlocutory injunction should be granted under s 45DB of the Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth) restraining union and others from conduct hindering applicant's trade or commerce between Australia and overseas
  2. 2 Whether the presumption under s 45DC of the Act applies to the union based on members’ conduct
  3. 3 Relevance of possible defence under s 45DD

Ratio Decidendi

There was sufficient material to consider that members of the crew who refused to sail, identified as union members, had acted in concert and substantially hindered the applicant’s trade. The presumption under s 45DC applied. The balance of convenience favoured granting an interlocutory injunction restraining the union’s officers, employees or agents from engaging in such conduct.

Court Disposition

Interlocutory injunction granted

Orders

  • Time for service of application be abridged
  • First respondent by its officers, employees or agents restrained from engaging in conduct, directly or indirectly, that substantially hinders applicant from engaging in international trade by the sailing of the Australian Enterprise from Fremantle at the set time or as soon as ready