Lend Lease Project Management & Construction (Australia) Pty Ltd v Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union [2011] FCA 590

Lend Lease Project Management & Construction (Australia) Pty Ltd v Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union [2011] FCA 590

The evidence established a prima facie case that officers of the first respondent encouraged workers at both sites to fail or refuse to attend for work or perform work, contrary to Fair Work Australia orders, and that the first respondent was responsible for that conduct. The balance of convenience favoured injunctive relief because the first respondent said it was not engaging in or encouraging industrial action, so the injunction would not interfere with conduct it wished to undertake and would assist compliance with the law and Fair Work Australia orders.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
26 May 2011
Procedural Posture
Fair Work Division Proceeding Concerning Alleged Unlawful Industrial Action and Alleged Breaches of an Enterprise Agreement, Seeking Injunctive Relief and Pecuniary Penalties / Interlocutory Application for Injunctive Relief
Outcome
Interlocutory injunctive relief granted against the first respondent until trial or earlier order.
Legal Topics
['interlocutory Injunction' 'unlawful Industrial Action' 'fair Work Australia Orders' 'union Responsibility for Conduct of Officers and Agents' 'enterprise Agreement Dispute']
['employment and Industrial Relations' 'building and Construction Industry' 'civil Procedure'] ['interlocutory Injunction' 'unlawful Industrial Action' 'fair Work Australia Orders' 'union Responsibility for Conduct of Officers and Agents' 'enterprise Agreement Dispute']

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

Fair Work Division Proceeding Concerning Alleged Unlawful Industrial Action and Alleged Breaches of an Enterprise Agreement, Seeking Injunctive Relief and Pecuniary Penalties / Interlocutory Application for Injunctive Relief

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the first respondent's officers encouraged workers at the Gold Coast University hospital site and the Supreme and District Court building project to withhold labour or refuse to attend or perform work." 'Whether there was a prima facie case that the first respondent was responsible for the conduct of its officers or agents.' 'Whether the balance of convenience favoured granting interlocutory injunctive relief.']

Ratio Decidendi

The evidence established a prima facie case that officers of the first respondent encouraged workers at both sites to fail or refuse to attend for work or perform work, contrary to Fair Work Australia orders, and that the first respondent was responsible for that conduct. The balance of convenience favoured injunctive relief because the first respondent said it was not engaging in or encouraging industrial action, so the injunction would not interfere with conduct it wished to undertake and would assist compliance with the law and Fair Work Australia orders.

Court Disposition

Interlocutory injunctive relief granted against the first respondent until trial or earlier order.

Orders

  • ['The first respondent is restrained from organising industrial action as defined in cl 5 of the order made by Fair Work Australia on 4 April 2011, or from aiding, abetting, directing, counselling, procuring, authorising, influencing, or encouraging any person to engage in such conduct.' 'The injunction restrains...