Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union v BHP Coal Pty Ltd (No 5) [2013] FCA 1384

Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union v BHP Coal Pty Ltd (No 5) [2013] FCA 1384

The respondent committed two separate contraventions of s 346 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth), not a single course of conduct, because Mr Adams and Mr Winter acted independently, the respondent made separate human resources inquiries into separate complaints concerning each worker, Mr Craig conducted separate inquiries, and the common theme of Mr Cramond's union resignation did not make the respondent's conduct one course of conduct. The contraventions were serious because the dismissals undermined freedom of association, caused damage by placing the workers under threat of permanent dismissal for reasons related to union roles and activities, involved deliberate actions and senior...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
17 December 2013
Procedural Posture
Industrial Law Civil Penalty Proceeding for Contraventions of S 346 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (cth) / Penalty Determination After Findings of Contravention
Outcome
Pecuniary penalties imposed on the respondent for two contraventions of s 346 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth), payable to the applicant.
Legal Topics
['contravention of S 346 Fair Work Act 2009 (cth)' 'pecuniary Penalties' 'single Course of Conduct' 'freedom of Association' 'payment of Penalties to Prosecuting Party']
['industrial Law' 'fair Work'] ['contravention of S 346 Fair Work Act 2009 (cth)' 'pecuniary Penalties' 'single Course of Conduct' 'freedom of Association' 'payment of Penalties to Prosecuting Party']

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

Industrial Law Civil Penalty Proceeding for Contraventions of S 346 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (cth) / Penalty Determination After Findings of Contravention

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the respondent should be liable to pay pecuniary penalties for two contraventions of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) or whether the conduct constituted a single course of conduct warranting one penalty.' "Whether the respondent's conduct was at the more serious end of the scale and what pecuniary penalty was appropriate." 'Whether the pecuniary penalties should be paid to the applicant.']

Ratio Decidendi

The respondent committed two separate contraventions of s 346 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth), not a single course of conduct, because Mr Adams and Mr Winter acted independently, the respondent made separate human resources inquiries into separate complaints concerning each worker, Mr Craig conducted separate inquiries, and the common theme of Mr Cramond's union resignation did not make the respondent's conduct one course of conduct. The contraventions were serious because the dismissals undermined freedom of association, caused damage by placing the workers under threat of permanent dismissal for reasons related to union roles and activities, involved deliberate actions and senior...

Court Disposition

Pecuniary penalties imposed on the respondent for two contraventions of s 346 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth), payable to the applicant.

Orders

  • ['Within 30 days of this order the respondent pay the applicant a pecuniary penalty of $60,000, being the total penalties payable in respect of two contraventions of s 346 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth).']