Tanner, L.J. v. Darroch, H.J. & Ors [1988] FCA 281

Tanner, L.J. v. Darroch, H.J. & Ors [1988] FCA 281

Because the applicant had resigned from the offices upon which his entitlement to orders was based before the orders could be made, no continuing obligation existed on the respondents under the rules at the relevant date. The obligations sought to be enforced had become past obligations, and the Court had no power under s.141 to grant the orders sought.

Parties
Applicant: Lindsay James Tanner; Respondent: H.J. Darroch; Respondent: J.P. Maynes; Respondent: K.Y. Harvey; Respondent: M.J. O'Sullivan
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
24 May 1988
Procedural Posture
Industrial Law Registered Organization Rules / Application for Orders Under S.141 of the Conciliation and Arbitration Act 1904
Outcome
Application dismissed; rule to show cause discharged
Legal Topics
Registered Organization Rules, Performance or Observance of Rules, Jurisdiction and Power Under S.141, Prospective Nature of Orders
Industrial Law Registered Organization Rules Performance or Observance of Rules Jurisdiction and Power Under S.141 Prospective Nature of Orders

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
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Lindsay James Tanner

Applicant

H.J. Darroch

Respondent

J.P. Maynes

Respondent

K.Y. Harvey

Respondent

M.J. O'Sullivan

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Industrial Law Registered Organization Rules / Application for Orders Under S.141 of the Conciliation and Arbitration Act 1904

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Court may make orders under s.141 where the applicant has ceased to hold the office conferring entitlement
  2. 2 Whether the obligation alleged against the respondents is continuing or has become a past obligation
  3. 3 Nature of the powers and orders the Court can make under s.141 of the Conciliation and Arbitration Act 1904

Ratio Decidendi

Because the applicant had resigned from the offices upon which his entitlement to orders was based before the orders could be made, no continuing obligation existed on the respondents under the rules at the relevant date. The obligations sought to be enforced had become past obligations, and the Court had no power under s.141 to grant the orders sought.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed; rule to show cause discharged

Orders

  • The amended rule to show cause is discharged.