Federal Court of Australia
\o" -
CATCHWORDS
Industrial law - Dismissal of employee - Whether employee member or delegate of an organization - Wnether employee entitled to the benefit of an
award - Whether purported oral variation of award took effect prior to signing of formal order - Whether employee seeking better industrial conditions - Employee asked to be delegate by union official - Whether employee a delegate of the organization pursuant to the Rules - Whether employee's
membership of organization or seeking to improve industrial conditions a substantial and operative reason for dismissal - Unsatisfactory work performance of employee - Discharge of onus of proof by employer with anti-union attitude.
Order for Costs - Costs - Federal Court's power to award costs in proceedings arising under Conciliation and Arbitration Act - Whether Federal Court limited to power under Federal Court of Australia Act - Proceedings not instituted vexatiously or without reasonable cause.
Conciliation and Arbitration Act 1904 ss. 197A; 118A(1); ; 110; 53 40
Federal Court of Australia Act s.43
DAMIEN STAPELTON v. AFRICAN LION SAFARI PTY. LIMITED
No. N.S.W. 36 of 1981
Coram: Ellicott J. Sydney 7 April, 29 June 1982
IN THE FEDERAL COURT
OF AUSTRALIA No. N.S.W. 36 of 1981 N.S.W. DISTRICT REGISTRY ;
INDUSTRIAL DIVISION )
DAMIEN STAPLETON
- (Prosecutor) ~~ °° 7
AFRICAN LION SAFART PTY. LIMITED (Defendant ) ORDER
JUDGE MAKING ORDER: Ellicott J. DATE OF ORDER: 7 April 1982 WHERE MADE: Sydney
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
The information be dismissed. ¢
IN THE FEDERAL COURT } ' No. N.S.W. 36 of 1981
OF AUSTRALTA N.S.W. DISTRICT REGISTRY
INDUSTRIAL DIVISION
DAMIEN STAPLETON (Prosecutor)
AFRICAN LION SAFART PTY. LIMITED ~
(Defendant)
CORAM: Ellicott J,
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
Damien Stapleton ("the informant"), as Federal Secretary of the Australian Theatrical and Amusement Employees' Association ("A.T.A.E.A.") has instituted proceedings pursuant to s.5 of the Conciliation and Arbitration Act, 1904 ("the Act") against African Lion Safari Pty. Limited ("the defendant") in relation to the dismissal of its former employee, Brian Tyrrell. He alleges that, on or about 16 June 1981, the defendant in breach of s.5 dismissed Mr Tyrrell by reason of the circumstances that he was a member of an organisation, i.e. the A.T.A.E.A., that he was entitled to the benefit of an industrial award, that he was a member of an
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