Murray v Marshall [1994] IRCA 144

Murray v Marshall [1994] IRCA 144

Rule 83(1) and (2), construed with the scheme of the union rules and the principle that the rules should, if possible, be read consistently with the Act, necessarily implies that specified misconduct by a Branch officer may be determined by a Special General Meeting and that the meeting may decide removal from office if the required two-thirds majority is obtained after notice, particulars and an opportunity to be heard. The Special General Meeting therefore has power to determine whether a Branch officer is guilty of the specified misconduct.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
16 December 1994
Procedural Posture
Rule to Show Cause Concerning Proposed Special General Meeting of the Victorian Branch of the United Firefighters Union of Australia / Determination of Separate Question Whether Rule 83 or Any Other Provisions Permit a General Meeting of the Branch to Hear and Determine Whether a Branch Officer Is Guilty Under the Rules of Conduct Permitting Removal From Office
Outcome
Separate question answered Yes.
Legal Topics
['removal of Branch Officers' 'construction of Union Rules' 'special General Meeting' 'misappropriation, Gross Misbehaviour and Gross Neglect of Duty']
['industrial Relations' 'trade Union Governance'] ['removal of Branch Officers' 'construction of Union Rules' 'special General Meeting' 'misappropriation, Gross Misbehaviour and Gross Neglect of Duty']

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

Rule to Show Cause Concerning Proposed Special General Meeting of the Victorian Branch of the United Firefighters Union of Australia / Determination of Separate Question Whether Rule 83 or Any Other Provisions Permit a General Meeting of the Branch to Hear and Determine Whether a Branch Officer Is Guilty Under the Rules of Conduct Permitting Removal From Office

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether Rule 83 or any other provisions of the union rules permit a General Meeting of the Branch to hear and determine whether an officer of the Branch is guilty under the Rules of conduct which pursuant to section 195(1)(c) of the Act permits removal from office.' 'Whether, if Rule 83 permits a Special General Meeting to hear and determine charges of specified misconduct, the rule contravenes section 196 of the Act.' 'Whether only the branch committee of management could lay charges under rule 39.']

Ratio Decidendi

Rule 83(1) and (2), construed with the scheme of the union rules and the principle that the rules should, if possible, be read consistently with the Act, necessarily implies that specified misconduct by a Branch officer may be determined by a Special General Meeting and that the meeting may decide removal from office if the required two-thirds majority is obtained after notice, particulars and an opportunity to be heard. The Special General Meeting therefore has power to determine whether a Branch officer is guilty of the specified misconduct.

Court Disposition

Separate question answered Yes.

Orders

  • ['The question whether Rule 83 or any other provisions of the Rules permits a General Meeting of the Branch to hear and determine whether an officer of the Branch is guilty under the Rules of conduct which pursuant to section 195(1)(c) of the Act permits removal from office was answered: Yes.']