R v Cohen; Ex parte Attorney-General (Qld) [1981] HCA 66
On the evidence, including testimony by union officials showing genuine intent to press the claims, and consistent with established case law, the onus on the prosecutors to prove the absence of a real and genuine dispute was not discharged; thus, the dispute found by the Commission was real and within jurisdiction.
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Procedural Posture
- Application for Writs of Prohibition and Certiorari / Return of Order Nisi
- Outcome
- order nisi discharged
- Legal Topics
- ['jurisdiction of the Australian Conciliation and Arbitration Commission' 'industrial Disputes' 'genuineness of Disputes' 'paper Dispute Doctrine' 'union Coverage']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Application for Writs of Prohibition and Certiorari / Return of Order Nisi
Legal Issues
- 1 ["Whether a real and genuine industrial dispute existed between the Australian Insurance Employees' Union and the Workers' Compensation Board of Queensland" "Whether the Commission had jurisdiction given the absence of union members among the Board's employees" 'Whether the motives of the union in serving the log of claims negated the existence of a genuine dispute']
Ratio Decidendi
On the evidence, including testimony by union officials showing genuine intent to press the claims, and consistent with established case law, the onus on the prosecutors to prove the absence of a real and genuine dispute was not discharged; thus, the dispute found by the Commission was real and within jurisdiction.
Court Disposition
order nisi discharged
Orders
- ['Order nisi for writs of prohibition and certiorari discharged.']
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment