Mapstone, David John Garland & Ors v Maynes, John Peter & Ors [1983] FCA 111

Mapstone, David John Garland & Ors v Maynes, John Peter & Ors [1983] FCA 111

Branch Council has exclusive authority under union rules to dismiss Branch organizers and direct their functions; Federal management lacks power to employ persons to carry out branch organizer duties in conflict with branch authority. Appeals by dismissed Branch organizers against Branch Council decisions are not permitted under the union rules, as such decisions pertain solely to matters affecting members of the branch. Any attempt by federal management to demand payment or overturn branch dismissal decisions contravenes the statutory autonomy required under s.140(1)(d) of the Act.

Parties
Applicant: David John Garland Mapstone; Applicant: Bernadette Anne Callaghan; Applicant: Gabrielle Mary Crawford; Applicant: Christopher Woods; Applicant: Dianne Margaret Linnane; First Respondent: John Peter Maynes; First Respondent: Joan Riordan; First Respondent: Terrence William Sullivan; First Respondent: Richard John Wasson; First Respondent: Vincent Higgins; First Respondent: Douglas Fry; First Respondent: Harry Krantz; First Respondent: John Daniel Smith; First Respondent: Maxwell Muller; First Respondent: Leslie Thomas Hauff; First Respondent: Gregory David Swords; First Respondent: John Duncan Cameron; Second Respondent: Alexandra John Nucifora; Second Respondent: Gordon McPherson; Second Respondent: David Lewis; Second Respondent: Graham Treacy; Second Respondent: Paul Griffiths; Second Respondent: Patrick James Brophy; Second Respondent: Tadeusz Marian Kowalski; Second Respondent: Vincent McKenna; Third Respondent: Federated Clerks Union of Australia
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
06 June 1983
Procedural Posture
Application for Orders Under S.141 of the Conciliation and Arbitration Act 1904 / Final Orders After Interim Relief
Outcome
Final orders granted in favour of applicants; respondents required to observe rules by terminating second respondents' employment as Branch organizers and appeals, and treat payment demand as null and void.
Legal Topics
Union Rules Construction, Branch Autonomy, Dismissal of Union Employees, Appeals Within Union Governance
Industrial Law Labour Law Union Rules Construction Branch Autonomy Dismissal of Union Employees Appeals Within Union Governance

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 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

David John Garland Mapstone

Applicant

Bernadette Anne Callaghan

Applicant

Gabrielle Mary Crawford

Applicant

Christopher Woods

Applicant

Dianne Margaret Linnane

Applicant

John Peter Maynes

First Respondent

Joan Riordan

First Respondent

Terrence William Sullivan

First Respondent

Richard John Wasson

First Respondent

Vincent Higgins

First Respondent

Douglas Fry

First Respondent

Harry Krantz

First Respondent

John Daniel Smith

First Respondent

Maxwell Muller

First Respondent

Leslie Thomas Hauff

First Respondent

Gregory David Swords

First Respondent

John Duncan Cameron

First Respondent

Alexandra John Nucifora

Second Respondent

Gordon McPherson

Second Respondent

David Lewis

Second Respondent

Graham Treacy

Second Respondent

Paul Griffiths

Second Respondent

Patrick James Brophy

Second Respondent

Tadeusz Marian Kowalski

Second Respondent

Vincent McKenna

Second Respondent

Federated Clerks Union of Australia

Third Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application for Orders Under S.141 of the Conciliation and Arbitration Act 1904 / Final Orders After Interim Relief

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Branch Council had exclusive power to dismiss Branch organizers under union rules
  2. 2 Whether federal management could employ and direct Branch organizers independently of branch authority
  3. 3 Whether the second respondents could appeal to the Federal Executive under union rules against their dismissal

Ratio Decidendi

Branch Council has exclusive authority under union rules to dismiss Branch organizers and direct their functions; Federal management lacks power to employ persons to carry out branch organizer duties in conflict with branch authority. Appeals by dismissed Branch organizers against Branch Council decisions are not permitted under the union rules, as such decisions pertain solely to matters affecting members of the branch. Any attempt by federal management to demand payment or overturn branch dismissal decisions contravenes the statutory autonomy required under s.140(1)(d) of the Act.

Court Disposition

Final orders granted in favour of applicants; respondents required to observe rules by terminating second respondents' employment as Branch organizers and appeals, and treat payment demand as null and void.

Orders

  • Respondents other than the third respondent to terminate forthwith the purported appeals by the second respondents from their dismissal as Branch organizers by the Branch Council of Federated Clerks' Union of Australia Central and Southern Queensland Branch.
  • Respondents other than the third respondent to terminate forthwith the employment of the second respondents to carry out the duties specified in rule 47 of the rules of the said Branch.