Laing v Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union [2003] FCA 1018

Laing v Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union [2003] FCA 1018

There is a serious issue to be tried as to whether the respondents' conduct constituted coercion under s 170NC(1) of the Workplace Relations Act 1996, and the balance of convenience strongly favored the grant of interlocutory injunctions to restrain such conduct to prevent substantial loss to WM Loud.

Parties
Applicant: William Laing; First Respondent: Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union; Second Respondent: John Cummins
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
24 September 2003
Procedural Posture
Application for Interlocutory Injunction / Interlocutory (reasons and Orders for Interim Relief)
Outcome
Interlocutory injunctions granted; costs reserved.
Legal Topics
Interlocutory Injunction, Coercion in Enterprise Bargaining, Industrial Action, Section 170 Nc(1) Contravention
Industrial Law Interlocutory Injunction Coercion in Enterprise Bargaining Industrial Action Section 170 Nc(1) Contravention

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 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

William Laing

Applicant

Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union

First Respondent

John Cummins

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application for Interlocutory Injunction / Interlocutory (reasons and Orders for Interim Relief)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether threats by the respondents constitute 'industrial or other action' with intent to coerce under s 170NC(1) of the Workplace Relations Act 1996
  2. 2 Whether there is a serious issue to be tried as to contravention of s 170NC(1)
  3. 3 Whether the balance of convenience favours the grant of interlocutory injunctions

Ratio Decidendi

There is a serious issue to be tried as to whether the respondents' conduct constituted coercion under s 170NC(1) of the Workplace Relations Act 1996, and the balance of convenience strongly favored the grant of interlocutory injunctions to restrain such conduct to prevent substantial loss to WM Loud.

Court Disposition

Interlocutory injunctions granted; costs reserved.

Orders

  • First Respondent restrained (by officers, employees, agents, etc.) from encouraging, advising, inciting and/or inducing SJ Higgins Pty Ltd, or any other actual or potential customer of WM Loud (Aust) Pty Ltd, to cease or refrain from engaging the services of WM Loud with the intent to coerce WM Loud to make an...
  • Second Respondent similarly restrained.