Williams, Hughie & Ors v Ward, Leonard Edward [1984] FCA 299

Williams, Hughie & Ors v Ward, Leonard Edward [1984] FCA 299

The respondent was required to observe the provisions of the union rules and carry into effect so much of the resolution of 13 June 1984 as required the termination of the employment of Mrs Fay Potter. Paragraph (b) of the resolution, to this extent, was within the power of the Branch Committee of Management. Other parts of the resolution (particularly those relating to administrative equipment and procedures) were outside the Committee's power and/or were insufficiently clear and precise for judicial enforcement.

Parties
Applicants: Hughie Williams, Allan McPaul, Clarence Rohweder, Gregory Newton, Henry Asplin, Stuart Crosby, David Pearce, Mervyn Kendall, John HINSPETER; Respondent: Leonard Edward Ward
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
26 September 1984
Procedural Posture
Application Under S.141 of the Conciliation and Arbitration Act 1904 / Hearing and Final Determination of Substantive Issues
Outcome
Partially granted
Legal Topics
Registered Organization, Construction of Rules, Resolutions of Branch Committee of Management, Employment of Staff, Termination of Employees' Services, Use of Branch Equipment by Sub Branch Staff, Inter Relation of Powers of Branch Committee of Management and Branch Secretary, Clarity and Precision of Resolutions, Judicial Power to Order Compliance With Union Rules
Industrial Law Registered Organization Construction of Rules Resolutions of Branch Committee of Management Employment of Staff Termination of Employees' Services Use of Branch Equipment by Sub Branch Staff Inter Relation of Powers of Branch Committee of Management and Branch Secretary +2 more

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 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Hughie Williams, Allan McPaul, Clarence Rohweder, Gregory Newton, Henry Asplin, Stuart Crosby, David Pearce, Mervyn Kendall, John HINSPETER

Applicants

Leonard Edward Ward

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application Under S.141 of the Conciliation and Arbitration Act 1904 / Hearing and Final Determination of Substantive Issues

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the resolutions of the Branch Committee of Management were authorised by the rules
  2. 2 Whether the resolution relating to termination of employment was sufficiently clear and precise to justify a court order enforcing it
  3. 3 Whether the Branch Committee of Management intended to act on the relevant resolution

Ratio Decidendi

The respondent was required to observe the provisions of the union rules and carry into effect so much of the resolution of 13 June 1984 as required the termination of the employment of Mrs Fay Potter. Paragraph (b) of the resolution, to this extent, was within the power of the Branch Committee of Management. Other parts of the resolution (particularly those relating to administrative equipment and procedures) were outside the Committee's power and/or were insufficiently clear and precise for judicial enforcement.

Court Disposition

Partially granted

Orders

  • The respondent is ordered to observe paragraph 47(c)(i) of the Union rules by carrying into effect that part of the resolution of 13 June 1984 requiring the necessary steps be taken to terminate the employment of Mrs Fay Potter as an employee of the Queensland Branch of the Union.
  • Otherwise the application is dismissed.