Kingham v Sutton [2001] FCA 328

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Kingham v Sutton [2001] FCA 328 INDUSTRIAL LAW – application for rule to show cause – whether serious question to be tried – application for interlocutory relief restraining respondents from taking steps to have rule amendments certified by Industrial Registrar and restraining Industrial Registrar from taking steps to certify rule amendments – whether interlocutory relief should be granted – whether Court has jurisdiction to grant injunctive relief against Industrial Registrar Workplace Relations Act 1996 (Cth): s 205, ss 209(1), (4) & (9) Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth): s 39B(1) & (2) Patrick Stevedores Operations (No 2) Pty Ltd v Maritime Union of Australia (1998) 153 ALR 641 applied Patrick Stevedores Operations (No 2) Pty Ltd v Maritime Union of Australia (1998) 195 CLR 1 referred to Australian Securities Commission v Melbourne Asset Management Nominees Pty Ltd (Receiver and Manager Appointed) (1994) 49 FCR 334 applied R v Joske; Ex parte Shop Distributive and Allied Employees' Association (1976) 135 CLR 194 referred to MARTIN KINGHAM & ORS v JOHN SUTTON & ORS V 214 of 2001 GOLDBERG J 23 MARCH 2001 MELBOURNE

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

VICTORIA DISTRICT REGISTRY V 214 of 2001

BETWEEN: MARTIN KINGHAM, MARTIN O'MALLEY, KEVIN REYNOLDS and GREG SIMCOE

Applicants

AND: JOHN SUTTON, VIC FITZGERALD, ALBERT LITTLER, BILL OLIVER, LINDSAY FRASER, ALEX BUKARICA, PETER McCLELLAND, TREVOR ZELTNER, PAUL WATERS, ANDREW FERGUSON, WALLY TROHEAR, GARRY HOWCROFT, TONY BENSON, BEN CARSLAKE, JOE McDONALD, GEORGE WASON and TREVOR MELKSHAM

First Respondents

MARGARET BUCHANAN, INDUSTRIAL REGISTRAR

Second Respondent

JUDGE: GOLDBERG J

DATE OF ORDER: 23 MARCH 2001

WHERE MADE: MELBOURNE