Cains, D.J. v Jenkins, E. & Ors [1979] FCA 145

Cains, D.J. v Jenkins, E. & Ors [1979] FCA 145

The appeal was dismissed because the appellant failed to establish that any committee member was so biased as to vitiate the decisions made, and there was no denial of natural justice in refusing representation or in the committee's procedure, given the consensual nature of the branch tribunal and adherence to the relevant rules under the Act.

Parties
Appellant: David James Cains; Respondent: Eileen Jenkins; Respondent: Carlo Frizziero; Respondent: Nick Pannagopoulos; Respondent: George Bissiotis; Respondent: Morgan Davis; Respondent: Paul Cooper; Respondent: Shirley Skidmore; Respondent: Alfred Gempton; Respondent: Elsie Hill; Respondent: Beverley Webber; Respondent: Shirley Birch; Respondent: Kim Hammerlund; Respondent: Brian Morel; Respondent: Megan Chalon
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
20 December 1979
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Final Judgment
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Registered Organisation, Removal From Office, Natural Justice, Procedural Fairness, Bias in Domestic Tribunals, Representation Rights
Industrial Law Registered Organisation Removal From Office Natural Justice Procedural Fairness Bias in Domestic Tribunals Representation Rights

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 4 Authorities cited 15 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

David James Cains

Appellant

Eileen Jenkins

Respondent

Carlo Frizziero

Respondent

Nick Pannagopoulos

Respondent

George Bissiotis

Respondent

Morgan Davis

Respondent

Paul Cooper

Respondent

Shirley Skidmore

Respondent

Alfred Gempton

Respondent

Elsie Hill

Respondent

Beverley Webber

Respondent

Shirley Birch

Respondent

Kim Hammerlund

Respondent

Brian Morel

Respondent

Megan Chalon

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there was actual bias or a reasonable apprehension of bias in the removal of the branch secretary by the committee.
  2. 2 Whether there was a denial of natural justice due to the refusal to allow representation or presence of an agent (Mr Romanin).
  3. 3 Whether the process and committee composition complied with requirements of the Conciliation and Arbitration Act and branch rules.

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was dismissed because the appellant failed to establish that any committee member was so biased as to vitiate the decisions made, and there was no denial of natural justice in refusing representation or in the committee's procedure, given the consensual nature of the branch tribunal and adherence to the relevant rules under the Act.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal be dismissed.