Cains, David James v Jenkins, Eileen & Ors [1979] FCA 29

ae Bai tse AR bk bh A

«

ah daa

ro ar See Sarees

N° o| 1N THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA LP

INDUSTRIAL DIVISION Vv. No. 16 cf 1979,

VICTORIA DISTRICT REGISTRY '

BETWEEN:

DAVID JAMES CAINS Claimant

29\ 07

and

. EILEEN JENKINS, CARLO FRIZ2IDRO, NiCK PANNAGOPOULOS, GEORGE BISSIOTIS, MORGAN DAVIS, PAUL COOPER, SHIRLEY SKIDMORE, ALFRED GEMPTON, ELSIC HILL, BEVERLEY WEBSER, SHIRLEY BIRCH, KIM HAMMERLUYD, BRIAN MOREL & MECAN CKALON Respondents

CATCHWORDS

Registered Organization - removal from office of branch secretary - powers of Committee of Management - natural justice - bias - refusal to allow representative of branch

secretary to be present...

Conciliation and Arbitration Act 1904, s.141l.

see

IN THE FPODERAL CORY OP AUS" UALTA

INDUSTRIAL DIVTS:: . V. No. 16 of 1975.

VICTORIA PISTRICT RUGISTRY

BETWEEN:

DAVID JAMES CAINS Claimant

and

PLUID, ol das

ORDER JUDGE MAING ORDER: Northrop J. DATE OF ORDPR: 26 Sune, 1379. WHERE MADE: Melbourne ORDER: Rule Nisi discharged.

BR 4z@4 A ézA A ASDA DS Bh

~_ & & & &

ya ere a Sana a aay

IN THE FLORAL. Cone OP _AUSTPALTA

INDUSTR DIVISICN V. No. 16 of 1979.

VICTORIA DISTRICT REGISTH

BLETWLE WN:

DAVID JALINS CAINS Claimant

and

EJLEEN JENKINS, CARLO PRI2ZTERO,

NICK PALS MORG: ay SKID: BLVER!

SOPOULCS , CEGRGE LiSsiovrrs,

Pash COOBIR,

vie

ROL DA MEGAN Ch Respondents NORTHPOP J. REASONS FOR JUDGIUNT 26 June,1979.

The claimant, Cavid Jaras Cains, 1S the secretary of the Victorian Branch of the Tedereated Conftucr.oner. Associaticn of Australia (the Association), an organzsation under the Conciliation and Arbctration Act 1904, as arendei, (the Act). Each of tue respondents 1s a mearber of the association and thus 18 under an oblication to perform or observe the rules of the association. The respondents, together with the claimant, comprise the cormittee of Managemcnt of the Victorian Branch of the Association (the Victorian Branch), see branch rule 9. On 11 April 1979, the committee of managorent of the Victorian Branch (the Committac) in the exercise of powe.s conferred by branch rule 40, removed the claimant from his office of secretary. In these proceedings, the claimant, pursuant to s.141 of the Act, is seeking orders directing respondents and each of them to perform or observe the rules of the Association by treating as null and void and of no leyal effect, the decisions of the meeting