Haritou v Skourdoumbis [2002] FCA 116

Haritou v Skourdoumbis [2002] FCA 116

Interim relief was refused because Mr Haritou did not show sufficient prospects or a sufficient basis for the relief sought: the Divisional Conference resolutions did not deprive the Divisional Branch Executive of jurisdiction; the particulars relied on did not establish invincible bias; no special circumstances had been shown to support a right to legal representation before the domestic tribunal; no prejudice from lack of preparation time was identified; and the minutes did not show unfairness in the conduct of the hearing.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
08 February 2002
Procedural Posture
Application Under S 209 of the Workplace Relations Act 1996 (cth) for Directions for Observance of Union Rules / Application for Interim Relief
Outcome
The application for interim relief was dismissed.
Legal Topics
['interim Relief' 'enforcement of Union Rules' 'disciplinary Charges Against Union Member' 'natural Justice' 'invincible Bias' 'right to Legal Representation' 'domestic Tribunal']
['industrial Law' 'trade Union Law'] ['interim Relief' 'enforcement of Union Rules' 'disciplinary Charges Against Union Member' 'natural Justice' 'invincible Bias' 'right to Legal Representation' 'domestic Tribunal']

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

Application Under S 209 of the Workplace Relations Act 1996 (cth) for Directions for Observance of Union Rules / Application for Interim Relief

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether resolutions of the Divisional Conference deprived the Divisional Branch Executive of authority to hear charges against Mr Haritou.' 'Whether the respondents were disqualified from hearing the charges because of invincible bias.' 'Whether denial of legal representation and time to prepare, and the manner in which the charges were dealt with, breached natural justice.' 'Whether interim relief should be granted under s 209(4) of the Workplace Relations Act 1996 (Cth).']

Ratio Decidendi

Interim relief was refused because Mr Haritou did not show sufficient prospects or a sufficient basis for the relief sought: the Divisional Conference resolutions did not deprive the Divisional Branch Executive of jurisdiction; the particulars relied on did not establish invincible bias; no special circumstances had been shown to support a right to legal representation before the domestic tribunal; no prejudice from lack of preparation time was identified; and the minutes did not show unfairness in the conduct of the hearing.

Court Disposition

The application for interim relief was dismissed.

Orders

  • ['The application for interim relief be dismissed.' 'The applicant file and serve any affidavits on which it seeks to rely at trial before 4.15 pm on 22 February 2002.' 'The respondents file and serve any affidavits on which they seek to rely at trial before 4.15 pm on 8 March 2002.' 'The matter be listed for...