Malincross Ltd. v. Building and Allied Trades Union [2001] IEHC 170 (30th November, 2001)

Malincross Ltd. v. Building and Allied Trades Union [2001] IEHC 170 (30th November, 2001)

There is a bona fide dispute as to whether the preconditions of Section 19(2) have been complied with, and the Defendants have not established entitlement to resist an interlocutory injunction. The balance of convenience strongly favours the Plaintiff, who would suffer irreparable harm if the injunction were refused, while any harm to the Defendants would be minimal.

Citation
[2001] IEHC 170
Parties
Plaintiff: [Plaintiff not named in excerpt]; Defendants: Building and Allied Trades Union and others
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Procedural Posture
Application for Interlocutory Injunction / Interlocutory
Outcome
Interlocutory Injunction granted
Legal Topics
Picketing, Interlocutory Injunctions, Trade Disputes, Secret Ballot Requirements, Transfer of Undertaking
Labour Law Contract Law Picketing Interlocutory Injunctions Trade Disputes Secret Ballot Requirements Transfer of Undertaking

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 4 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

[Plaintiff not named in excerpt]

Plaintiff

Building and Allied Trades Union and others

Defendants

Procedural Posture

Application for Interlocutory Injunction / Interlocutory

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Defendants are entitled to continue picketing the site after the employer has vacated the premises
  2. 2 Whether the secret ballot held by the Union authorises continued picketing
  3. 3 Whether Section 19(2) of the Industrial Relations Act precludes the grant of an interlocutory injunction

Ratio Decidendi

There is a bona fide dispute as to whether the preconditions of Section 19(2) have been complied with, and the Defendants have not established entitlement to resist an interlocutory injunction. The balance of convenience strongly favours the Plaintiff, who would suffer irreparable harm if the injunction were refused, while any harm to the Defendants would be minimal.

Court Disposition

Interlocutory Injunction granted

Orders

  • Defendants restrained from picketing the Plaintiff's site at Naul Road, Balbriggan, Co. Dublin, on terms that the Plaintiff give an undertaking as to damages.