Re Laybutt, R.J. & anor Ex parte Robinson, G. & anor [1985] FCA 355

Re Laybutt, R.J. & anor Ex parte Robinson, G. & anor [1985] FCA 355

The respondents' conduct in maintaining the picket line and secondary boycott was not protected by s 45D(3) because (a) there were no present employees of the applicant acting in concert with the respondents and (b) the dominant purpose of the conduct was to secure the tally system as general union policy, not to achieve improved remuneration or conditions for any specific employees at Mudginberri. Consequently, the injunction was granted against the first to fifth respondents to restrain further proscribed conduct under s 45D.

Parties
Applicant: Mudginberri Station Pty. Limited; First Respondent: The Australasian Meat Industry Employees Union; Second Respondent: Jack O'Toole; Third Respondent: Trevor Surplice; Fourth Respondent: Dick Annear; Fifth Respondent: Pat Roughan; Sixth Respondent: Meat Inspectors Association; Seventh Respondent: Gordon McColl; Eighth Respondent: Alex Thompson
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
17 July 1985
Procedural Posture
Application for Injunction (civil) / Final Determination at First Instance
Outcome
Injunction granted against first to fifth respondents. Costs awarded to applicant. Application for damages stood over.
Legal Topics
Secondary Boycott, Picket Line, Section 45 D Trade Practices Act, Industrial Action, Purpose Test in Industrial Context, Employee Status in Concerted Conduct, Injunctions
Trade Practices Industrial Law Secondary Boycott Picket Line Section 45 D Trade Practices Act Industrial Action Purpose Test in Industrial Context Employee Status in Concerted Conduct +1 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 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mudginberri Station Pty. Limited

Applicant

The Australasian Meat Industry Employees Union

First Respondent

Jack O'Toole

Second Respondent

Trevor Surplice

Third Respondent

Dick Annear

Fourth Respondent

Pat Roughan

Fifth Respondent

Meat Inspectors Association

Sixth Respondent

Gordon McColl

Seventh Respondent

Alex Thompson

Eighth Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application for Injunction (civil) / Final Determination at First Instance

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the respondents contravened s 45D(1) of the Trade Practices Act by organising and maintaining a picket line and secondary boycott at Mudginberri Abattoirs;
  2. 2 Whether the respondents' conduct was protected by the defence in s 45D(3) of the Trade Practices Act (i.e., whether the dominant purpose was substantially related to remuneration, conditions, hours, or working conditions of the employer's employees, and whether the conduct was in concert with such employees);
  3. 3 Whether any present employees of the applicant were acting in concert with the respondents for the purposes of the statutory defence.

Ratio Decidendi

The respondents' conduct in maintaining the picket line and secondary boycott was not protected by s 45D(3) because (a) there were no present employees of the applicant acting in concert with the respondents and (b) the dominant purpose of the conduct was to secure the tally system as general union policy, not to achieve improved remuneration or conditions for any specific employees at Mudginberri. Consequently, the injunction was granted against the first to fifth respondents to restrain further proscribed conduct under s 45D.

Court Disposition

Injunction granted against first to fifth respondents. Costs awarded to applicant. Application for damages stood over.

Orders

  • First to fifth respondents restrained from imposing or maintaining any ban or picket at Mudginberri Abattoirs of the type described in the orders, including impeding ordinary business activities.
  • First to fifth respondents restrained from aiding, abetting, counselling, procuring, inducing, or conspiring with others in the proscribed conduct.