CATCHWORDS Industrial law - registered organization - election - new ballot - roll of voters - private addresses of financial members unknown - whether proper to delete from roll - whether to send ballot papers by certified mail. Conciliation and Arbitration Act 1904, ss.4, 133AA, 165, 171. IN THE MATTER OF AN APPLICATION BY SHIRLEY MELLOR FOR AN INQUIRY INTO AN ELECTION IN THE FEDERATED LIQUOR AND ALLIED INDUSTRIES EMPLOYEES UNION OF AUSTRALIA. No. 06 OF 1986 GRAY J. BRISBANE 27TH MARCH 1987 FEDERAL coy, AUSTRALIA OK PRINCI REGIShAT IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALTA ) ) QUEENSLAND DISTRICT REGISTRY ) No. O06 of 1926INDUSTRIAL DIVISION ) IN THE MATTER of an application by SHIRLEY MELLOR for an inquiry unto an election in the FEDERATED LIQUOR AND ALLIED INDUSTRIES EMPLOYEES UNION OF AUSTRALIA JUDGE: GRAY J. DATE: 27TH MARCH 1987 EX TEMPORE REASONS FOR JUDGMENT On 26th November 1986, the Court found in this inquiry that irregularitzes had occurred in or in connection with the elections for the offices of State Secretary/Treasurer and Assistant State Secretary in the Queensland Branch of the Federated Liquor and Allied [Industries Employees Union of Australia, and made certain orders in consequence of that finding, and in conSequence of being satisfied that the results of the elections may be affected by those irregularities. The orders involved the conduct of a fresh balict between the existing candidates. Certain of the orders were in the following terms: "3. The persons eligible to vote be members of the Federated Liquor and Allied Industries Employees Union un its Queensland branch who are financial in accordance with the rules as at 2e November 1986. -2- 4. The roll of voters for such fresh ballot be prepared in the following manner:-— (a) omor before 24 December 1986 the State President of the Queensland branch of the Federated Liquor and Allied Industries Employees' Union of Australia, Noel Rawle Horn, supply to the Australian Electoral Commission a list of the names and addresses of the members eligible to vote ir such ballot; (b) The Returning Officer take such steps as he sees fit, by direction or request to any person or persons, to ascertain the private addresses of any members for whom private addresses do not appear on the list supplied. 5. In the conduct of the fresh ballot, so far as possible, ballot papers be sent to the private addresses of persons eligible to vote, but where private addresses are not available, ballot papers be sent to work place addresses." — Pursuant to those orders, Mr. Horn supplied to the Australian Electoral Commission a list of persons certified by him to be financial in accordance with the rules of the Union as at 26th November 1986. It was intended by the Returning Officer that that list, with any subsequent additions, deletions and alterations, should constitute the roll of persons eligible to vote in the fresh ballot. Subsequently, much correspondence has passed between Mr. Horn and the Returning Officer at the Australian Electoral Commission, concerning the final form of the roll. It is unnecessary for me to review the entirety of that correspondence. It is_sufficient to say that the correspondence reveals that the combined efforts of Mr. Horn and the Returning Officer have produced a quite remarkable result in ascertaining private addresses of members of the Branch, whose private addresses did not appear in the records of the Union. On 16th March 1987 the Returning Officer sent ta Mr. Horn a list of 1,451 members who were on the list of persons eligible to vote, but in respect of whom private addresses were not available. As a result of certain inquiries made by him, Mr. Horn now proposes that certain alterations be made in the roll of voters. Application has been made before me today for the purpose of obtaining further directions with respect to the preparation of the roll of voters for the fresh ballot. Mr. Horn's proposal is that certain persons, whose private addresses have not been ascertained, should be deleted from the list of persons eligible to vote. I am informed that the number of such persons is now 1,060. As I have already indicated, I should be most reluctant to order that persons be deleted from the roll of voters when it has already been certified that they were financial in accordance with the rules of the Union as at 26th November 1986. There are, of course, all sorts of possible ways in which those persons might receive ballot papers, even though their private addresses are not known and their employers, or former employers, .are not able to indicate any forwarding addresses. They may, for instance, still have workmates employed in the relevant establishments, who advise them that ballot papers_are waiting for them, or management may be able to get in touch with them in some other way. They may indeed hear from other publicity that the election 15 in progress, and attend at their former places of employment in order to obtain their ballot Papers. For those reasons I am reluctant to delete those persons from the list of persons which will form the basis of the electoral roll. The proposal has been put to me, on behalf of Messrs. . Elton and Hardie, two candidates in the elections, that persons in the category of "no private address known and unknown to their former employers" should only have their ballot papers sent to them by certified mail. It is suggested that this would provide some security against those ballot papers falling into the hands of persons who may misuse them. The Returning Officer proposes to give substantial directions to / employers at whose establishments voters are listed without their private addresses. Having heard what those proposals are, I indicate that I prefer them to the proposal that certified mail be used. I am impressed by the argument that the use of certified mail would impose an additional requirement on some voters which would not be suffered by others, namely, the requirement that they should sign a receipt for a certified mail article, and perhaps attend at a post office for the purpose of dosing so, in order simply to receive a ballot paper. In my view, such an additional burden is unjustified. I do not propose to give any direction to the Returning Officer, since he is primarily responsible for the conduct of the ballot, but I indicate that I do not propose to accede to the directions which have been sought by Messrs. Elton and Hardie. It would be wrong for me to leave the matter without making some remarks about a controversy which appears to have arisen between Mr. Horn and the Returning Officer. As I have - 5s - previously remarked, their combined efforts have produced an extraordinary result, which could not have been predicted on 26th November 1986, as to the number of private addresses which have been ascertained. In correspondence with the Returning Officer, Mr. Horn has made some complaints, and the Returning Officer, by his solicitor, has made some complaints today about Mr. Horn's activities, indicating that they are unhelpful. I cannot, of course, give any directions to Mr. Horn at the present time, because he is not a party to the proceeding and has not been advised of the possibility of any such fivections. I do point out that the Returning Officer does have power to give directions to Mr. Horn, if he sees fit to do so. I should say, however, that on the evidence before me, Mr. Horn appears to have acted entirely with the best of motives and not at any stage to have set out to make the Returning Officer's job more difficuit. I do commend both Mr. Horn and the Returning Officer for the effort that they have put into the conduct of this fresh ballot. Save for that, I do not propose to pass judgment on any of the activities of either. I have already indicated that I do not propose to give any further directions, so it appears to me that no formal order will be necessary. [After hearing further argument:] I will direct that as from this day any party wishing to exercise the liberty to apply reserved in the order made on 26th November 1986 give 48 hours notice in writing to each other party. I certify that this end the preceding pa _vS are a truce copy cf the Reasons for Judgment herein of his Honour Mr. Justice Cncy Associate Dated: lo 4+ ey Melanie tou