Saint-Gobain Warehousing Pty Ltd v National Union of Workers & Ors [2006] NSWSC 1210

Saint-Gobain Warehousing Pty Ltd v National Union of Workers & Ors [2006] NSWSC 1210

There is a serious question to be tried concerning besetting, but not physical obstruction, justifying an interlocutory injunction restraining the union from engaging in besetting conduct pending trial. The injunction should bind only the union, not individual defendants, due to evidentiary uncertainties.

Parties
Plaintiff: Saint-Gobain Warehousing Pty Ltd; First Defendant: National Union of Workers; Second Defendant: Paul Zammit; Third Defendant: Nenad Mujcinovic; Fourth Defendant: Maine Pau Tai; Fifth Defendant: Peter Ryan; Sixth Defendant: Gyan Chandra; Seventh Defendant: Varadaraj Subramani; Eighth Defendant: Justin Cody; Ninth Defendant: Wayne Meaney; Tenth Defendant: Tony Seymour; Eleventh Defendant: Jeff Gearin; Twelfth Defendant: Zenaida Rivera
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
13 November 2006
Procedural Posture
Interlocutory Application / Interlocutory Injunction Decision
Outcome
Limited interlocutory injunction granted
Legal Topics
Nuisance, Besetting, Picketing, Interlocutory Relief, Balance of Convenience
Tort Industrial Law Nuisance Besetting Picketing Interlocutory Relief Balance of Convenience

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 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Saint-Gobain Warehousing Pty Ltd

Plaintiff

National Union of Workers

First Defendant

Paul Zammit

Second Defendant

Nenad Mujcinovic

Third Defendant

Maine Pau Tai

Fourth Defendant

Peter Ryan

Fifth Defendant

Gyan Chandra

Sixth Defendant

Varadaraj Subramani

Seventh Defendant

Justin Cody

Eighth Defendant

Wayne Meaney

Ninth Defendant

Tony Seymour

Tenth Defendant

Jeff Gearin

Eleventh Defendant

Zenaida Rivera

Twelfth Defendant

Procedural Posture

Interlocutory Application / Interlocutory Injunction Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether union-organised picket at plaintiff's warehouse constitutes tortious nuisance by obstruction or besetting
  2. 2 Whether serious question to be tried as to physical obstruction or besetting
  3. 3 Whether the balance of convenience favours interlocutory relief

Ratio Decidendi

There is a serious question to be tried concerning besetting, but not physical obstruction, justifying an interlocutory injunction restraining the union from engaging in besetting conduct pending trial. The injunction should bind only the union, not individual defendants, due to evidentiary uncertainties.

Court Disposition

Limited interlocutory injunction granted

Orders

  • National Union of Workers restrained, pending final disposition, from acting with others so as to beset or attempt to beset, by words or gestures seeking to coerce, threaten, or suggest adverse consequences, any person approaching or leaving the plaintiff's premises
  • National Union of Workers restrained from aiding, abetting, counselling, procuring or inducing persons to act in company with others so as to beset or attempt to beset persons approaching or leaving premises