Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Construction, Forestry, Mining & Energy Union v Wagstaff Piling Pty Ltd [2012] FCAFC 87 Citation: Construction, Forestry, Mining & Energy Union v Wagstaff Piling Pty Ltd [2012] FCAFC 87
Appeal from: Wagstaff Piling Pty Ltd; Thiess Pty Ltd v Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union [2011] FWAFB 6892
Parties: CONSTRUCTION, FORESTRY, MINING & ENERGY UNION v WAGSTAFF PILING PTY LTD, THIESS PTY LTD and FAIR WORK AUSTRALIA
File number: VID 1236 of 2011
Judges: BUCHANAN, FLICK AND KATZMANN JJ
Date of judgment: 14 June 2012
Catchwords: INDUSTRIAL LAW – construction of a union collective agreement – whether employer was entitled to require its employees to submit to mandatory drug and alcohol testing – agreement did not expressly prohibit nor provide for mandatory drug and alcohol testing – agreement should not be construed as dealing comprehensively with all matters relating to the employment relationship ADMINISTRATIVE LAW – jurisdictional error – an industrial tribunal cannot exercise judicial power – an industrial tribunal may form and act upon opinions about legal rights as a step in the exercise of its own powers – the participation of an industrial tribunal in a dispute settling procedure cannot be conditioned on it reaching a legally correct opinion
Legislation: Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) Fair Work (Transitional Provisions and Consequential Amendments) Act 2009 (Cth) Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth) Occupational Health and Safety Act 2004 (Vic) Workplace Relations Act 1996 (Cth)
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate