Meneling Station Pty Ltd v A.M.I.E.U. [1987] FCA 51

IN_THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY No. I9 of 1987

wee ww

GENERAL DIVISION

BETWEEN: MENELING STATION PTY

LIMITED Applicant AND: AUSTRALASTIAN MEAT INDUSTRY

EMPLOYEES UNION Respondent

COURT: BOWEN C.d. DATE: 11 February, 1987 PLACE: Sydney

EX TEMPORE REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

This 15 a notice of motion brought by Meneling Station Pty Limited against the Australasian Meat Industry Employees Union for an order that execution and judgment given by Evatt J in this Court on 14 January 1987 between those two parties be

stayed pending the determination of an appeal which has been

lodged, and seeking an order for costs.

The judgment in question ordered that pursuant to

section 119 of the Conciliation and Arbitration Act, 1904,

pecuniary penalties be imposed on Meneling Station Pty Limited in

four respects: (a) $750 for breach of Clause 23(c) of the

stay. This is sometimes put on the basis of showing special or exceptional circumstances or, as was put in Alexander v Cambridge

Credit Corporation Limited (1985) 2 NSWLR 685, that it is "an appropriate case", without laying down what are the limits of

appropriate cases. Where of course the subject matter of the appeal which is in question will disappear unless a stay be granted, there is an obvious case to hold the position so that the fruits of the appeal will not be lost; or if the positions of the parties are going to alter dramatically in some fashion, then there may be a case made out for a stay so that the appeal which is given by right is not rendered nugatory. This case does not

fall into those categories where the position of the appellant

will be defeated if a stay be not granted.

I did ask counsel for the applicant whether he asserted

that the Union would not be able to repay the moneys if the appeal were successful in this or any other higher court. He did

not assert that the Union would not be able to repay the money in

those circumstances.

There was a further complexity in that the cases relating to stays mostly deal with civil proceedings. These are unusual proceedings where not only are they under the

Conciliation and Arbitration Act but they are proceedings for a

penalty, where the judge has a right given to him to order payment to one of the parties and has done so. In that sense the

successful party has what is normally referred to in the cases