Fair Work Ombudsman v Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union (MV Portland Separate Question Case) [2018] FCA 956

Fair Work Ombudsman v Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union (MV Portland Separate Question Case) [2018] FCA 956

It is just and convenient, having regard to the narrowness of the issue, limited factual contest, and potential to resolve the proceedings significantly or disposed efficiently, for the proposed separate question concerning the scope and operation of the Enterprise Agreement to be heard and determined separately pursuant to r 30.01 of the Federal Court Rules 2011.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
13 June 2018
Procedural Posture
Application (interlocutory) / Order for Separate Question Prior to Trial on Merits
Outcome
Order made for separate question to be heard and determined
Legal Topics
['separate Determination of Questions' 'scope of Enterprise Agreement' 'industrial Action']
['employment & Industrial Relations' 'practice and Procedure'] ['separate Determination of Questions' 'scope of Enterprise Agreement' 'industrial Action']

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 (interlocutory) / Order for Separate Question Prior to Trial on Merits

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the proposed separate question regarding the operation of the enterprise agreement should be heard and determined separately under Rule 30.01 of the Federal Court Rules 2011' 'Whether, on or by 13 November 2015, the MV Portland had ceased to ‘operate in the trade’ within clause 4 of the ASP Ship Management Pty Ltd Seagoing Ratings Enterprise Agreement 2012' 'Whether, if the vessel was not operating in the trade, the Agreement ceased to cover certain Respondents' 'Whether certain Respondents not named in Schedule 3 of the Agreement are covered by the Agreement']

Ratio Decidendi

It is just and convenient, having regard to the narrowness of the issue, limited factual contest, and potential to resolve the proceedings significantly or disposed efficiently, for the proposed separate question concerning the scope and operation of the Enterprise Agreement to be heard and determined separately pursuant to r 30.01 of the Federal Court Rules 2011.

Court Disposition

Order made for separate question to be heard and determined

Orders

  • ['Pursuant to rule 30.01 of the Federal Court Rules 2011 the Court hear and determine the specified separate questions relating to the scope and coverage of the enterprise agreement.' 'Timetabling orders for evidence and submissions relating to the separate question by specified dates between 28 June 2018 and 4...