Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Kingham v Ferguson [2001] FCA 537 INDUSTRIAL LAW – rule to show cause – application for orders that the respondents perform and observe the Rules by treating postal vote as invalid - whether rule enabling Divisional Secretary to conduct postal vote subject to implied limitation of urgency – whether review by Divisional Conference of decision of Divisional Executive can be conducted by postal vote.
Workplace Relations Act 1996 (Cth): s 196, s 209
Adams v Yung (1988) 83 FCR 248 referred to MARTIN KINGHAM & ORS v ANDREW FERGUSON & ORS V 271 of 2001 GOLDBERG J 9 MAY 2001 MELBOURNE
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
VICTORIA DISTRICT REGISTRY V 271 of 2001
BETWEEN: MARTIN KINGHAM, MARTIN O'MALLEY, KEVIN REYNOLDS and GREG SIMCOE
Applicants
AND: ANDREW FERGUSON, JOSE MARIO BARRIOS, NIKOLA BOTIC, HUNBERTO BRAZAO, BRANKO BUKARICA, ROBERT COCHRANE, MICHAEL FOSTER, LINDSAY FRASER, BARRY HEMSWORTH, MICHAEL LANE, MARK McBRIDE, PETER McCLELLAND, LUDWIG STRUTZENBERGER, JOHN SUTTON, ANTE ZDRILIC, TREVOR JOHN MELKSHAM, JOE McDONALD, KIM YOUNG, KEVIN McPARLAND, TERRENCE JAMES McINTYRE, CARL PURCELL, WILLIAM WALLACE TROHEAR, LAURENCE JOHN GENRICH, CHRISTOPHER PRICE, THOMAS SMITH, JASON PETER STEIN, PAUL BRIAN WATERS, GEORGE WASON, GLENN PARRY, SARAH SCHOONWATER, DALE LESLIE CRACKNELL, ANTHONY ROSS BENSON, JOHN CUMMINS, JOHN FURLONG, ALBERT EDWARD LITTLER, JOHN LOH, DAVE NOONAN, FRANCIS O'GRADY, WILLIAM OLIVER, JOHN SETKA, ROY WILLIAMS, BEN CARSLAKE, P L KAINE
Respondents JUDGE: GOLDBERG J
DATE OF ORDER: 9 MAY 2001
WHERE MADE: MELBOURNE
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1. Pursuant to s 209 of the Workplace Relations Act 1996 (Cth) ("the Act"), the respondents and each of them perform and observe the Rules ("the Rules") of the Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union, Construction and General Division ("the Division") by treating as null and void and of no effect the decision of the fourteenth respondent under rule 8(xv) of the Rules on or about 9 April 2001 to conduct a postal vote of the Divisional Conference of the Division on the matter of a review sought by the first applicant of the decision of the Divisional Executive of the Division on 22 March 2001 to make certain changes to the Rules ("the postal vote"). 2. Pursuant to section 209 of the Act, the respondents and each of them perform and observe the Rules by treating the postal vote as null and void and of no effect. Note: Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules
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