Health Services Union v Asmar [2024] FCA 1168

Health Services Union v Asmar [2024] FCA 1168

There is a serious question that the Victorian No. 1 Branch of the Health Services Union has ceased to function effectively and that there are no effective means under the current Union rules to restore functionality, warranting interlocutory relief to restrain giving effect to a branch resolution to pay legal costs pending resolution of the substantive application; the balance of convenience favours preserving the status quo given the risks to union assets and uncertainty of recoupment.

Parties
Applicant: Health Services Union; First Respondent: Diana Asmar; Second Respondent: Rhonda Barclay; Third Respondent: David Eden; Fourth Respondent: Lee Atkinson; Fifth Respondent: Sherida Jacks; Sixth Respondent: Andrew Hargreaves; Seventh Respondent: Susan Stone; Eighth Respondent: Danny Harika; Ninth Respondent: Nick Katsis; Tenth Respondent: Aleksandros Ioanidis; Eleventh Respondent: Lisa Fisher; Twelfth Respondent: Koula Vasiliadis; Thirteenth Respondent: Toula Leggasick; Fourteenth Respondent: Dianne Stratton; Fifteenth Respondent: Diosie McCallum
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
07 October 2024
Procedural Posture
Interlocutory Application for Injunction/relief / Determination of Interlocutory Relief and Undertakings; Listing for Case Management
Outcome
Interlocutory relief granted in part; orders made as to undertakings; substitution order granted; legal costs resolution restrained; balance of relief dismissed; matter listed for case management.
Legal Topics
Union Administration, Interlocutory Injunctions, Registered Organisations, Union Governance, Reprisal Conduct, Autonomy of Union Branches
Employment and Industrial Relations Union Administration Interlocutory Injunctions Registered Organisations Union Governance Reprisal Conduct Autonomy of Union Branches

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 3 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Health Services Union

Applicant

Diana Asmar

First Respondent

Rhonda Barclay

Second Respondent

David Eden

Third Respondent

Lee Atkinson

Fourth Respondent

Sherida Jacks

Fifth Respondent

Andrew Hargreaves

Sixth Respondent

Susan Stone

Seventh Respondent

Danny Harika

Eighth Respondent

Nick Katsis

Ninth Respondent

Aleksandros Ioanidis

Tenth Respondent

Lisa Fisher

Eleventh Respondent

Koula Vasiliadis

Twelfth Respondent

Toula Leggasick

Thirteenth Respondent

Dianne Stratton

Fourteenth Respondent

Diosie McCallum

Fifteenth Respondent

Procedural Posture

Interlocutory Application for Injunction/relief / Determination of Interlocutory Relief and Undertakings; Listing for Case Management

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Victorian No. 1 Branch of the Health Services Union has ceased to function effectively and whether there are effective means under the rules to enable it to function effectively
  2. 2 Whether interlocutory relief restraining payment of legal costs should be granted

Ratio Decidendi

There is a serious question that the Victorian No. 1 Branch of the Health Services Union has ceased to function effectively and that there are no effective means under the current Union rules to restore functionality, warranting interlocutory relief to restrain giving effect to a branch resolution to pay legal costs pending resolution of the substantive application; the balance of convenience favours preserving the status quo given the risks to union assets and uncertainty of recoupment.

Court Disposition

Interlocutory relief granted in part; orders made as to undertakings; substitution order granted; legal costs resolution restrained; balance of relief dismissed; matter listed for case management.

Orders

  • Record undertakings given by the respondents as set out in the orders.
  • Substitute Mr Danny Harika for Ms Velda Mitchell as Eighth Respondent.