Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Prezbel Pty Limited, in the matter of an application for an inquiry relating to an election for offices in the Australian Hotels Association, New South Wales Branch [2003] FCA 242 WORKPLACE RELATIONS – inquiry under s 218 of Workplace Relations Act 1996 (Cth) – inquiry into alleged irregularity in election of delegates to Council of Australian Hotels Association, New South Wales Branch – proper interpretation of rules of Association – meaning of 'nominate as Delegates'- grammatical analysis – context of rule – whether person nominated must be financial member or nominated representative of financial member - whether a person may nominate himself or herself
WORDS AND PHRASES – 'nominate', 'nominate as Delegate'
Workplace Relations Act 1996 (Cth)ss 218, 223
FAI General Insurance Co Limited v McSweeney (1997) 73 FCR 379 cited Amalgamated Society of Engineers v Smith (1913) 16 CLR 537 followed
Meehan and Tulloch, Grammar for Lawyers, Butterworths, 2001 PREZBEL PTY LIMITED v AUSTRALIAN ELECTORAL COMMISSION N 105 of 2003 WILLIAM CURTEIS & CO PTY LIMITED v AUSTRALIAN ELECTORAL COMMISSION N 106 of 2003 BRANSON J 24 MARCH 2003 SYDNEY
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY N 105 of 2003
BETWEEN: PREZBEL PTY LIMITED
APPLICANT
AND: AUSTRALIAN ELECTORAL COMMISSION
RESPONDENT
N 106 of 2003
BETWEEN: WILLIAM CURTEIS & CO PTY LIMITED
APPLICANT
AND: AUSTRALIAN ELECTORAL COMMISSION
RESPONDENT
JUDGE: BRANSON J
DATE: 24 MARCH 2003
PLACE: SYDNEY
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
INTRODUCTION 1 Each of Prezbel Pty Limited and William Curteis & Co Pty Limited applied to the Court under s 218 of the Workplace Relations Act 1996 (Cth) ('the WRA') for an inquiry into an alleged irregularity in relation to the election of officers, namely delegates to Council of the Australian Hotels Association, New South Wales Branch ('the Association'). The Association is an organisation registered under the WRA. 2 On 27 February 2003 I declared, in respect of each application, that I was satisfied that there was reasonable ground for the application. I fixed not before 12.00 noon on 14 March 2003 as the time for conducting the inquiry and the Federal Court of Australia, Queens Square, Sydney as the place for the inquiry. Directions were given to ensure that all persons who are or may be justly entitled to appear at the inquiry were notified of the time and place fixed for the inquiry. 3 At the commencement of the inquiry appearances were announced on behalf of the applicants, the Australian Electoral Commission, certain of the members of the Executive Committee of the Association and Mr John Thorpe, President of the Association. I was satisfied that the applicants, the Australian Electoral Commission and each of the individuals on whose behalf an appearance was announced was justly entitled to appear at the inquiry. They are to be taken to be parties to the proceedings before me.
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