Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Southcorp Australia Pty Limited v Automotive, Food, Metals, Engineering, Printing & Kindred Industries Union [2000] FCA 1480 INDUSTRIAL LAW – picketing and strike activities – injunction to restrain picketing and strike activities – activities jeopardising commercial contracts of applicant – whether picketing and strike protected action pursuant to Workplace Relations Act 1996 (Cth) – serious question to be tried. Workplace Relations Act 1996 (Cth): ss 127(6) & (7), 170NG SOUTHCORP AUSTRALIA PTY LIMITED v AUTOMOTIVE, FOOD, METALS, ENGINEERING, PRINTING AND KINDRED INDUSTRIES UNION V 788 of 2000 GOLDBERG J 12 OCTOBER 2000 MELBOURNE
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
VICTORIA DISTRICT REGISTRY V 788 of 2000
BETWEEN: SOUTHCORP AUSTRALIA PTY LTD
(ACN 004 213 665)
Applicant
AND: AUTOMOTIVE, FOOD, METALS, ENGINEERING, PRINTING AND KINDRED INDUSTRIES UNION
Respondent JUDGE: GOLDBERG J
DATE OF ORDER: 12 OCTOBER 2000
WHERE MADE: MELBOURNE
UPON the applicant by its counsel undertaking: (a) to submit to such order (if any) as the Court may consider to be just for the payment of compensation, to be assessed by the Court or as it may direct, to any person, whether or not a party, adversely affected by the operation of the interlocutory order made hereunder or any continuation, with or without variation, thereof; and (b) to pay the compensation referred to in (a) to the person there referred to.
THE COURT ORDERS THAT: 1. Until 4.00pm on 27 October 2000 or further order, the respondent, whether by itself, its officers, agents, members employed by the applicant at its premises at 17 McNaughton Road, Clayton, Victoria and at 127 Cherry Lane, Laverton, Victoria or otherwise howsoever, be restrained from: (a) preventing, hindering or interfering with free access to and egress from the premises of the applicant at 17 McNaughton Road, Clayton, Victoria ("the Clayton premises") and at 127 Cherry Lane, Laverton, Victoria ("the Laverton premises"); (b) abusing, threatening, besetting, harassing or intimidating any person, entering or leaving or about to enter or leave or who has entered or left the Clayton premises or the Laverton premises; (c) abusing, threatening, besetting, harassing or intimidating any person who is at the Laverton premises or the Clayton premises; (d) inducing, procuring, advising or persuading any person not to enter or not to leave the Clayton premises or the Laverton premises or attempting to induce, procure, advise or so persuade any person; (e) inducing, procuring or advising any of its members who are employees of the applicant at its Clayton Premises or its Laverton premises not to perform for the applicant the work they are required to perform in accordance with the terms of their employment.
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