Zuzek and The AWU-FIME Amalgamated Union Building Construction and Joinery Branch Victorian Sub-Branch v Dagles Trading Pty Ltd

Zuzek and The AWU-FIME Amalgamated Union Building Construction and Joinery Branch Victorian Sub-Branch v Dagles Trading Pty Ltd

The dismissal of the matter and refusal to reinstate it caused injustice because the first-named applicant was prevented from having the application heard on the merits; in the circumstances of Mr Sutton's illness and inability to find a competent replacement, the refusal to reinstate was too harsh, so the Judicial Registrar's order was set aside and the application reinstated.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
31 August 1995
Procedural Posture
Application Pursuant to S170 EA of the Industrial Relations Act 1988 for a Remedy in Respect to Termination of Employment / Review of Judicial Registrar's Refusal to Reinstate Application After It Was Struck Out for Non Appearance
Outcome
Judicial Registrar's refusal to reinstate the matter set aside; application reinstated and listed for further directions.
Legal Topics
['termination of Employment' 'reinstatement of Application' 'non Appearance at Directions Hearing' "review of Judicial Registrar's Order" 'costs']
['industrial Law' 'employment Law'] ['termination of Employment' 'reinstatement of Application' 'non Appearance at Directions Hearing' "review of Judicial Registrar's Order" 'costs']

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 Pursuant to S170 EA of the Industrial Relations Act 1988 for a Remedy in Respect to Termination of Employment / Review of Judicial Registrar's Refusal to Reinstate Application After It Was Struck Out for Non Appearance

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the Judicial Registrar's order refusing to reinstate the application should be set aside after the applicants failed to appear at the first directions hearing." "Whether the application should be reinstated despite the applicants' non-appearance caused by the applicants' advocate being ill and unable to find a replacement." 'Whether costs should be ordered against the second-named applicant on the basis that the union was not a true party.']

Ratio Decidendi

The dismissal of the matter and refusal to reinstate it caused injustice because the first-named applicant was prevented from having the application heard on the merits; in the circumstances of Mr Sutton's illness and inability to find a competent replacement, the refusal to reinstate was too harsh, so the Judicial Registrar's order was set aside and the application reinstated.

Court Disposition

Judicial Registrar's refusal to reinstate the matter set aside; application reinstated and listed for further directions.

Orders

  • ['The order of Judicial Registrar Ryan made on 18 July 1995 refusing to reinstate the matter is set aside.' 'The application is reinstated.' 'The application is to be heard by a Judicial Registrar on a date to be fixed.' 'The application be listed for directions on Tuesday, 5 September 1995 at 10.15 am, and in the...