Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union v BM Alliance Coal Operations Pty Ltd [2018] FCA 1590

Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union v BM Alliance Coal Operations Pty Ltd [2018] FCA 1590

The applicant established a serious question to be tried regarding whether the respondent took adverse action against Ms Star for a prohibited reason, and the balance of convenience favoured granting the interlocutory injunction because the respondent provided no adequate reason for excluding Ms Star and failed to identify any prejudice if she returned, whereas Ms Star demonstrated personal detriment. Consequently, the applicant was entitled to interlocutory relief restraining the respondent from excluding Ms Star from the mine pending final determination.

Parties
Applicant: Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union; Respondent: BM Alliance Coal Operations Pty Ltd
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
22 October 2018
Procedural Posture
Application for Interlocutory Injunction / Interlocutory Application Determination of Entitlement to Interim Relief Pending Trial
Outcome
Interlocutory injunction granted in favour of the applicant.
Legal Topics
Interlocutory Injunctions, Adverse Action, Workplace Rights, Balance of Convenience, Prima Facie Case, Statutory Bar
Practice and Procedure Industrial Law Employment Law Interlocutory Injunctions Adverse Action Workplace Rights Balance of Convenience Prima Facie Case +1 more

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 5 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union

Applicant

BM Alliance Coal Operations Pty Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application for Interlocutory Injunction / Interlocutory Application Determination of Entitlement to Interim Relief Pending Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant is entitled to interlocutory injunctive relief restraining the respondent from excluding Kim Star from attending the mine
  2. 2 Whether adverse action was taken for a prohibited reason in contravention of s 340 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth)
  3. 3 Whether the application is statute barred under s 725 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth)

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant established a serious question to be tried regarding whether the respondent took adverse action against Ms Star for a prohibited reason, and the balance of convenience favoured granting the interlocutory injunction because the respondent provided no adequate reason for excluding Ms Star and failed to identify any prejudice if she returned, whereas Ms Star demonstrated personal detriment. Consequently, the applicant was entitled to interlocutory relief restraining the respondent from excluding Ms Star from the mine pending final determination.

Court Disposition

Interlocutory injunction granted in favour of the applicant.

Orders

  • Until the hearing and determination of this matter or further order, the respondent, by itself, its servants or agents, be restrained from excluding or otherwise preventing Kim Star from attending the Goonyella Riverside Mine to perform work there on behalf of WorkPac Pty Ltd pursuant to the labour hire contract...