Lawrence v Morris [2002] FCA 874

Lawrence v Morris [2002] FCA 874

The Constitution of Club Plus conferred the power to nominate member representative directors on the Liquor and Hospitality Division of the New South Wales Branch, while appointment was by the directors of Club Plus. The LHMU itself had no role under the Constitution or Trust Deed and r 71 did not apply. The Liquor and Hospitality Division, though not a separate legal person, was an organisation representing the interests of members of the Scheme for the purposes of s 10(1) of the SIS Act, and its Committee of Management could exercise the Division's nomination function. The director fees were paid for services as directors of Club Plus, not as LHMU delegates or representatives, so the...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
11 July 2002
Procedural Posture
Application Under S 209 of the Workplace Relations Act 1996 (cth) for Orders Requiring Members of the LHMU to Comply With Union Rules / Order to Show Cause; Final Judgment
Outcome
Order to Show Cause discharged.
Legal Topics
['union Rules' 'member Representative Directors' 'corporate Trustee of Employer Sponsored Superannuation Fund' 'nomination and Appointment of Directors' 'director Remuneration' 'meaning of Trade Union, Or Other Organisation']
['industrial Law' 'superannuation Law'] ['union Rules' 'member Representative Directors' 'corporate Trustee of Employer Sponsored Superannuation Fund' 'nomination and Appointment of Directors' 'director Remuneration' 'meaning of Trade Union, or Other Organisation']

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 Under S 209 of the Workplace Relations Act 1996 (cth) for Orders Requiring Members of the LHMU to Comply With Union Rules / Order to Show Cause; Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether r 71 of the LHMU Rules entitled the National Council or National Executive of the LHMU to nominate or appoint the member representative directors of Club Plus Superannuation Pty Ltd.' 'Whether the Liquor and Hospitality Division of the New South Wales Branch of the LHMU was a trade union, or other organisation, representing members of the Scheme for the purposes of s 10(1) of the Superannuation Industry (Supervision) Act 1993 (Cth).' 'Whether the Committee of Management of the Liquor and Hospitality Division could nominate member representative directors of Club Plus.' 'Whether member representative directors of Club Plus were required by the LHMU Rules or resolutions to pay their director remuneration to the LHMU.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Constitution of Club Plus conferred the power to nominate member representative directors on the Liquor and Hospitality Division of the New South Wales Branch, while appointment was by the directors of Club Plus. The LHMU itself had no role under the Constitution or Trust Deed and r 71 did not apply. The Liquor and Hospitality Division, though not a separate legal person, was an organisation representing the interests of members of the Scheme for the purposes of s 10(1) of the SIS Act, and its Committee of Management could exercise the Division's nomination function. The director fees were paid for services as directors of Club Plus, not as LHMU delegates or representatives, so the...

Court Disposition

Order to Show Cause discharged.

Orders

  • ['The Order to Show Cause be discharged.']