Pine v Doyle [2005] FCA 977

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Pine v Doyle [2005] FCA 977

INDUSTRIAL LAW – application for a penalty to be imposed on a union organiser for intentionally hindering or obstructing an employee and an employer when exercising a statutory power to enter premises – whether the union organiser was exercising the statutory power of entry when he had no legal entitlement to exercise the power – whether diverting an employee away from performing the employee's duties constitutes hindering or obstructing the employee – whether the hindering or obstructing alleged against the union organiser was intentional

Workplace Relations Act 1996 (Cth) ss 285A, 285C, 285D, 285E and 285F Acts Interpretations Act 1901 (Cth) s 15AA

Briginshaw v Briginshaw (1938) 60 CLR 336 - applied O'Reilly v The Commissioner of the State Bank of Victoria (1983) 153 CLR 1 - applied Curran v Thomas Borthwicks & Sons Ltd (1990) 26 FCR 241 - cited Kingston v Keprose Pty Ltd (1987) 11 NSWLR 404 - cited Bropho v State of Western Australia (1990) 171 CLR 1 - cited Leonard v Morris (1975) 10 SASR 528 - cited MEAA v Advertiser Newspapers Ltd (1996) 41 AILR 3-504 - cited Graham H Roberts Pty Ltd v Maurbeth Investments Pty Ltd (1974) 1 NSWLR 93 - cited Halliday v Nevill (1984) 155 CLR 1 - cited Molina v Zaknich (2001) 24 WAR 562 - cited LISETTE EILEEN PINE v FERGAL DOYLE VID 649 OF 2004 MERKEL J 18 JULY 2005 MELBOURNE

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

VICTORIA DISTRICT REGISTRY VID 649 OF 2004

BETWEEN: LISETTE EILEEN PINE

APPLICANT

AND: FERGAL DOYLE

RESPONDENT

JUDGE: MERKEL J

DATE OF ORDER: 18 JULY 2005

WHERE MADE: MELBOURNE

THE COURT ORDERS THAT the application be dismissed. Note: Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA