Bramich v Transport Workers Union of Australia [1999] FCA 510

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Bramich v Transport Workers' Union of Australia [1999] FCA 510 INDUSTRIAL LAW – rule to show cause – whether respondent union's Federal Council entitled to disband branch – whether rule 23 of respondent union's rules invalid – whether invalid pursuant to s196(c) of the Workplace Relations Act 1996 (Cth) – whether invalid for failure to afford an opportunity to the branch to make representations as to why it should not be disbanded – natural justice – whether mechanisms provided by the rule for representation of affected members are appropriate – whether the rule offends s195(1)(b)(iv) of the Act. Workplace Relations Act 1996 (Cth) ss 187A, 195(1)(b)(iv), 195(1)(c), 196(c), 208, 209.

Hansch v Transport Workers' Union of Australia (1998) 85 IR 310, followed McLeish v Kane (1978) 36 FLR 80, applied Thornton v Mackay (1946) 56 CAR 561, referred to Watson v Transport Workers' Union of Australia (1946) 56 CAR 347, referred to Kenney v Operative Painters and Decorators Union of Australia (1954) 81 CAR 166, referred to

Wright v Australian Workers' Union (1965) 7 FLR 148, referred to Watson v Australian Workers' Union (1967) 10 FLR 347, referred to Higgins v Nicol (1971) 18 FLR 343, referred to Luckman v Australian Postal & Telecommunications Union (1978) 36 FLR 68, referred to Municipal Officers' Association of Australia v Lancaster (1981) 54 FLR 129, applied Lewis v Maynes (1988) 27 IR 113, followed Imlach v Daley (1985) 7 FCR 457, applied Campbell v Crawford (1986) 12 FCR 317, followed Williams v Ward (1984) 8 IR 234, followed

JOHN NELSON BRAMICH AND OTHERS v TRANSPORT WORKERS' UNION OF AUSTRALIA AND OTHERS

TG 22 OF 1998

MARSHALL J

HOBART

9 APRIL 1999

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

TASMANIA DISTRICT REGISTRY TG 22 OF 1998

BETWEEN: JOHN NELSON BRAMICH