Purvinas, in the matter of an application for an inquiry in relation to an election for offices in the Australian Licenced Aircraft Engineers Association [2010] FCA 672

Purvinas, in the matter of an application for an inquiry in relation to an election for offices in the Australian Licenced Aircraft Engineers Association [2010] FCA 672

Sub-rule 22(e) requires a nominee for offices including Federal Secretary and Trustee either to hold a licence or to have held a licence which is readily capable of being renewed. Because both Mr Purvinas and Mr Re had previously held licences that were readily capable of renewal, the Returning Officer wrongly rejected their nominations; those rejections were irregularities.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
29 June 2010
Procedural Posture
Application for an Inquiry Relating to an Election for Offices in the Australian Licenced Aircraft Engineers Association / Reasons for Judgment After Hearing; Parties Ordered to Bring in Short Minutes Within 48 Hours
Outcome
The Returning Officer wrongly rejected the nominations of Mr Purvinas and Mr Re; the rejections were irregularities. The Court indicated there should be an election for Federal Secretary and would hear the parties on final orders.
Legal Topics
['registered Organisations' 'election Inquiry' 'eligibility for Office' 'construction of Union Rules' 'licenced Aircraft Maintenance Engineer Qualifications']
['industrial Law'] ['registered Organisations' 'election Inquiry' 'eligibility for Office' 'construction of Union Rules' 'licenced Aircraft Maintenance Engineer Qualifications']

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 for an Inquiry Relating to an Election for Offices in the Australian Licenced Aircraft Engineers Association / Reasons for Judgment After Hearing; Parties Ordered to Bring in Short Minutes Within 48 Hours

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the requirement in sub-rule 22(e) that a candidate must "hold qualifications as a Licenced Aircraft Maintenance Engineer" is satisfied only if the candidate holds a current licence.' 'Whether the Returning Officer wrongly rejected the nominations of Mr Purvinas for Federal Secretary and Mr Re for Trustee because their licences were not current at the time of nomination.']

Ratio Decidendi

Sub-rule 22(e) requires a nominee for offices including Federal Secretary and Trustee either to hold a licence or to have held a licence which is readily capable of being renewed. Because both Mr Purvinas and Mr Re had previously held licences that were readily capable of renewal, the Returning Officer wrongly rejected their nominations; those rejections were irregularities.

Court Disposition

The Returning Officer wrongly rejected the nominations of Mr Purvinas and Mr Re; the rejections were irregularities. The Court indicated there should be an election for Federal Secretary and would hear the parties on final orders.

Orders

  • ['The parties bring in short minutes within 48 hours to give effect to these reasons.']