Cozadinos v Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union [2012] FCA 46

Cozadinos v Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union [2012] FCA 46

The evidence did not establish, on the balance of probabilities and having regard to the penal nature of the proceeding, that the respondents made a threat with intent to coerce or apply undue pressure, nor that discriminatory statements were made capable of producing actionable consequences under the statutory provisions. Accordingly, no contravention of ss 44(1) or 45(1) of the Building and Construction Industry Improvement Act 2005 (Cth) was proved.

Parties
Applicant: Michelle Cozadinos; First Respondent: Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union; Second Respondent: Jason Bell
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
06 February 2012
Procedural Posture
Civil / Final Judgment
Outcome
application dismissed
Legal Topics
Building and Construction Industry, Threat With Intent to Coerce or Apply Undue Pressure, Discrimination, Civil Penalties, Union Membership Requirements
Industrial Law Building and Construction Industry Threat With Intent to Coerce or Apply Undue Pressure Discrimination Civil Penalties Union Membership Requirements

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 4 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Michelle Cozadinos

Applicant

Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union

First Respondent

Jason Bell

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the respondents contravened ss 44(1) and 45(1) of the Building and Construction Industry Improvement Act 2005 (Cth)
  2. 2 Whether a threat with intent to coerce or apply undue pressure was made
  3. 3 Whether alleged discriminatory statements constitute actionable discrimination

Ratio Decidendi

The evidence did not establish, on the balance of probabilities and having regard to the penal nature of the proceeding, that the respondents made a threat with intent to coerce or apply undue pressure, nor that discriminatory statements were made capable of producing actionable consequences under the statutory provisions. Accordingly, no contravention of ss 44(1) or 45(1) of the Building and Construction Industry Improvement Act 2005 (Cth) was proved.

Court Disposition

application dismissed

Orders

  • The application be dismissed.
  • The applicant pay the respondents' costs of the proceeding.