Edwards, R. & Ors v Gietzelt, Ray & Ors [1983] FCA 412

Edwards, R. & Ors v Gietzelt, Ray & Ors [1983] FCA 412

The resolution of the Branch Executive, properly construed in context, did not contradict the special branch meeting's decision but maintained the applicants' employment while exercising the employer's right to require non-performance of duties with pay pending the referendum. There was no deprivation of rights; the interim relief sought was refused.

Parties
Applicant: R. Edwards; Applicant: R. Grant; Applicant: G. Lewin; Applicant: R. Cheshire; Applicant: G. Slater; Applicant: P. Hind; Applicant: K. Beardsley; Respondent: Ray Lintzelt; Respondent: Christouln Sy Allen; Respondent: H. Heluut; Respondent: A. Waylor; Respondent: Toy; Respondent: P. Cor; Respondent: Allxander; Respondent: C. Vettos; Respondent: Krhyts; Respondent: B. Weeks; Respondent: F. Sb3b Dlgiglio; Respondent: J. Cc Evdey; Respondent: L. Breen; Respondent: Riley; Respondent: B. Batt; Respondent: Federated Miscellaneous Workers' Union of Australia
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
28 October 1983
Procedural Posture
Application for Interim Order / Interim Relief Ex Tempore Judgment
Outcome
Application for interim relief rejected
Legal Topics
Suspension From Employment, Union Rules and Procedures, Meaning of Suspension, Employer's Right to Direct Employee Not to Work, Consistency of Union Resolutions
Employment Law Industrial Law Suspension From Employment Union Rules and Procedures Meaning of Suspension Employer's Right to Direct Employee Not to Work Consistency of Union Resolutions

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

R. Edwards

Applicant

R. Grant

Applicant

G. Lewin

Applicant

R. Cheshire

Applicant

G. Slater

Applicant

P. Hind

Applicant

K. Beardsley

Applicant

Ray Lintzelt

Respondent

Christouln Sy Allen

Respondent

H. Heluut

Respondent

A. Waylor

Respondent

Toy

Respondent

P. Cor

Respondent

Allxander

Respondent

C. Vettos

Respondent

Krhyts

Respondent

B. Weeks

Respondent

F. Sb3b Dlgiglio

Respondent

J. Cc Evdey

Respondent

L. Breen

Respondent

Riley

Respondent

B. Batt

Respondent

Federated Miscellaneous Workers' Union of Australia

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application for Interim Order / Interim Relief Ex Tempore Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the resolution of the Victorian Branch Executive to suspend the applicants with pay pending a referendum was inconsistent with the resolution of a special branch meeting to reinstate them
  2. 2 Meaning of 'suspension' in this context
  3. 3 Whether the Branch Executive's conduct contravened r.59 of the union rules

Ratio Decidendi

The resolution of the Branch Executive, properly construed in context, did not contradict the special branch meeting's decision but maintained the applicants' employment while exercising the employer's right to require non-performance of duties with pay pending the referendum. There was no deprivation of rights; the interim relief sought was refused.

Court Disposition

Application for interim relief rejected

Orders

  • Application for interim relief refused
  • Liberty to apply with reference to future conduct of the motion reserved to any party