Kenneth Charles Mooney v Michael Wirrick, Colin O'Malley, Barry Healy, Rod Waters, Ian Jane, John Davidson, Bob Petrovski, Mark Kingsbury, Michael Sacco, Robert Carter, George Pascoe, Jim Fokianos [1996] IRCA 64

Kenneth Charles Mooney v Michael Wirrick, Colin O'Malley, Barry Healy, Rod Waters, Ian Jane, John Davidson, Bob Petrovski, Mark Kingsbury, Michael Sacco, Robert Carter, George Pascoe, Jim Fokianos [1996] IRCA 64

Although assuming a serious issue to be tried, the balance of convenience did not favour the grant of interim orders as it would likely create division within the Branch and displace individuals who were appointed to fill casual vacancies.

Parties
Applicant: Kenneth Charles Mooney; Respondent: Michael Wirrick; Respondent: Colin O'Malley; Respondent: Barry Healy; Respondent: Rod Waters; Respondent: Ian Jane; Respondent: John Davidson; Respondent: Bob Petroivski; Respondent: Mark Kingsbury; Respondent: Michael Sacco; Respondent: Robert Carter; Respondent: George Pascoe; Respondent: Jim Fokianos
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
20 February 1996
Procedural Posture
Application for Interim Orders / Interim Relief Hearing
Outcome
Application for interim orders dismissed.
Legal Topics
Registered Organisations, Interim Orders, Balance of Convenience
Industrial Law Registered Organisations Interim Orders Balance of Convenience

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 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kenneth Charles Mooney

Applicant

Michael Wirrick

Respondent

Colin O'Malley

Respondent

Barry Healy

Respondent

Rod Waters

Respondent

Ian Jane

Respondent

John Davidson

Respondent

Bob Petroivski

Respondent

Mark Kingsbury

Respondent

Michael Sacco

Respondent

Robert Carter

Respondent

George Pascoe

Respondent

Jim Fokianos

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application for Interim Orders / Interim Relief Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant should be granted interim orders recognising his continued holding of honorary offices within the Victorian Branch of the Federated Gas Employees Industrial Union
  2. 2 Whether the balance of convenience favours granting interim relief

Ratio Decidendi

Although assuming a serious issue to be tried, the balance of convenience did not favour the grant of interim orders as it would likely create division within the Branch and displace individuals who were appointed to fill casual vacancies.

Court Disposition

Application for interim orders dismissed.

Orders

  • The application for interim orders be dismissed.