Transfield Pty Ltd v Communications Electrical Electronic Energy Information Postal Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia [2002] FCA 870

Transfield Pty Ltd v Communications Electrical Electronic Energy Information Postal Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia [2002] FCA 870

The unions were not enjoined because the evidence did not disclose a serious issue to be tried that they had directed, induced, encouraged or procured the strike or were likely to do so; on the contrary, union officials urged a return to work. CEPU members employed by Corke were also outside s 170MN(1) because no...

Source-derived case information.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
08 July 2002
Procedural Posture
Application for Interlocutory Injunction Under S 170 Mn(1) of the Workplace Relations Act 1996 (cth) / Interlocutory Application
Outcome
Interlocutory injunction granted against the sixth to fourteenth respondents; no injunction granted against the unions or CEPU/Corke employee respondents; liberty to apply reserved; costs reserved.
Legal Topics
['interlocutory Injunction' 'industrial Action' 'certified Agreements' 'site Specific Agreement' 'strike Action' 'responsibility of Unions for Strike Action' 'workplace Relations Act 1996 (cth) S 170 Mn(1)']
['industrial Law' 'workplace Relations'] ['interlocutory Injunction' 'industrial Action' 'certified Agreements' 'site Specific Agreement' 'strike Action' 'responsibility of Unions for Strike Action' 'workplace Relations Act 1996 (cth) S 170 Mn(1)']

Source-derived case record

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 Interlocutory Injunction Under S 170 Mn(1) of the Workplace Relations Act 1996 (cth) / Interlocutory Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether there was a serious issue to be tried as to the responsibility of the respondent unions for the strike and any further involvement by them.' 'Whether CEPU members employed by Corke fell within s 170MN(1) where no claim had been made against Corke.' 'Whether the individual AMWU or AWU respondents were engaging in strike action in contravention of s 170MN.' "Whether the balance of convenience supported interlocutory relief in light of Transfield's claimed losses."]

Ratio Decidendi

The unions were not enjoined because the evidence did not disclose a serious issue to be tried that they had directed, induced, encouraged or procured the strike or were likely to do so; on the contrary, union officials urged a return to work. CEPU members employed by Corke were also outside s 170MN(1) because no claim had been made against Corke. However, there was a serious issue to be tried that the AMWU or AWU individual respondents employed by Transfield were engaging in strike action contrary to s 170MN, and Transfield's significant loss justified interlocutory restraint against the sixth to fourteenth respondents.

Court Disposition

Interlocutory injunction granted against the sixth to fourteenth respondents; no injunction granted against the unions or CEPU/Corke employee respondents; liberty to apply reserved; costs reserved.

Orders

  • ['Until the hearing and determination of the proceeding or 31 March 2003, whichever is earlier, or further order, the sixth to fourteenth respondents be restrained from continuing the strike action commenced on 2 July 2002 and from failing to work in accordance with the terms of the certified agreement binding upon...