Alfred v Walter Construction Group Limited [2005] FCA 497

Alfred v Walter Construction Group Limited [2005] FCA 497

Because the third respondent admitted and consented to findings that it contravened s 170NC(1) on three occasions, and the agreed facts showed conduct calculated to interfere with protected freedom to negotiate a Federal EBA and to prevent the subcontractor continuing work on the Site, penalties were warranted. The three contraventions were related and required a just and appropriate aggregate penalty; deterrence was important, while the pre-trial acknowledgment modestly mitigated penalty. An aggregate penalty of $7,500, comprising $2,500 for each contravention, was appropriate.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
03 May 2005
Procedural Posture
Industrial Law Proceeding for Declaratory Relief and Civil Penalties Under the Workplace Relations Act 1996 (cth) / Reasons for Judgment and Orders After Discontinuance Against Other Respondents and Admissions by the Third Respondent
Outcome
Declaration made against the third respondent; three penalties imposed; proceeding otherwise dismissed.
Legal Topics
['workplace Relations Act 1996 (cth) Part VIB Certified Agreements' 'contravention of S 170 Nc(1)' 'civil Penalties Under S 170 Nf' 'declarations' 'totality Principle' 'deterrence and Mitigation']
['industrial Law' 'workplace Relations'] ['workplace Relations Act 1996 (cth) Part VIB Certified Agreements' 'contravention of S 170 Nc(1)' 'civil Penalties Under S 170 Nf' 'declarations' 'totality Principle' 'deterrence and Mitigation']

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

Industrial Law Proceeding for Declaratory Relief and Civil Penalties Under the Workplace Relations Act 1996 (cth) / Reasons for Judgment and Orders After Discontinuance Against Other Respondents and Admissions by the Third Respondent

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether a declaration should be made that the third respondent contravened s 170NC(1) of the Workplace Relations Act 1996 (Cth).' 'Whether penalties should be imposed under s 170NF for three contraventions of s 170NC(1).' 'What aggregate and individual penalties were appropriate having regard to the related nature of the contraventions, deterrence, consequences, prior conduct and mitigation.']

Ratio Decidendi

Because the third respondent admitted and consented to findings that it contravened s 170NC(1) on three occasions, and the agreed facts showed conduct calculated to interfere with protected freedom to negotiate a Federal EBA and to prevent the subcontractor continuing work on the Site, penalties were warranted. The three contraventions were related and required a just and appropriate aggregate penalty; deterrence was important, while the pre-trial acknowledgment modestly mitigated penalty. An aggregate penalty of $7,500, comprising $2,500 for each contravention, was appropriate.

Court Disposition

Declaration made against the third respondent; three penalties imposed; proceeding otherwise dismissed.

Orders

  • ['It be declared that, having regard to the facts and matters set out in paragraphs 28, 29, 30, 31, 32 and 33 of the second further amended statement of claim, the third respondent contravened subsection 170NC(1) of the Workplace Relations Act 1996 (Cth) on the occasions, and in the respects, set out in paragraphs...