Roberts, J.T. v Murlar Pty Ltd & Ors [1986] FCA 185

Roberts, J.T. v Murlar Pty Ltd & Ors [1986] FCA 185

There are serious questions to be tried as to whether the alleged conduct is caught by s.45E(1)(c) of the Act; the cause of action is not so plainly untenable as to warrant summary dismissal, and the balance of convenience favours the grant of interim relief.

Parties
Applicant: John Thomas Roberts; First Respondent: Murlar Pty Limited; Second Respondent: Building Workers' Industrial Union of Australia; Third Respondent: Mario Alberici; Fourth Respondent: Lew Zivanovich
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
05 May 1986
Procedural Posture
Application for Interlocutory Relief / Interlocutory
Outcome
Interim orders granted; application for summary dismissal rejected
Legal Topics
Interlocutory Relief, Statutory Construction, Industrial Relations, Union Membership, Contracts for Services
Trade Practices Employment Law Interlocutory Relief Statutory Construction Industrial Relations Union Membership Contracts for Services

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 2 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

John Thomas Roberts

Applicant

Murlar Pty Limited

First Respondent

Building Workers' Industrial Union of Australia

Second Respondent

Mario Alberici

Third Respondent

Lew Zivanovich

Fourth Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application for Interlocutory Relief / Interlocutory

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant's statement of claim disclosed a cause of action under s.45E(1)(c) of the Trade Practices Act 1974
  2. 2 Whether 'services' as defined in the Act includes the performance of work under a contract of service
  3. 3 Whether there was a contravention involving arrangements to compel union membership

Ratio Decidendi

There are serious questions to be tried as to whether the alleged conduct is caught by s.45E(1)(c) of the Act; the cause of action is not so plainly untenable as to warrant summary dismissal, and the balance of convenience favours the grant of interim relief.

Court Disposition

Interim orders granted; application for summary dismissal rejected

Orders

  • The first-named respondent (Murlar Pty Limited) is to continue to employ the applicant without imposing conditions relating to union membership or resignation.
  • The first-named respondent is to cease making arrangements or understandings of the type complained of.