Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Furlong v Maxim Electrical Services (Aust) Pty Ltd [2005] FCA 1518
INDUSTRIAL LAW – payments in relation to periods of industrial action – breach admitted – no utility in imposing penalty Workplace Relations Act 1996 (Cth) s 187AA
Pine v Seelite Windows & Doors Pty Ltd [2005] FCA 500, followed
Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Woolworths (South Australia) (2003) 198 ALR 417, referred to
Pine v Multiplex Constructions (Vic) Pty Ltd [2005] FCA 1428, followed
MURRAY FURLONG v MAXIM ELECTRICAL SERVICES (AUST) PTY LTD,WALTER J PRATT LTD, COMMUNICATIONS, ELECTRICAL, ELECTRONIC, ENERGY, INFORMATION, POSTAL, PLUMBING AND ALLIED SERVICES UNION OF AUSTRALIA, DAVID MIER, MARK GRECH, MICHAEL DOUGLAS and MAXIM ELECTRICAL SERVICES (VIC) PTY LTD
VID 1580 OF 2004 MARSHALL J 27 OCTOBER 2005 MELBOURNE
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
VICTORIA DISTRICT REGISTRY VID 1580 OF 2004
BETWEEN: MURRAY FURLONG
APPLICANT
AND: MAXIM ELECTRICAL SERVICES (AUST) PTY LTD
FIRST RESPONDENT
WALTER J PRATT LTD
SECOND RESPONDENT
COMMUNICATIONS, ELECTRICAL, ELECTRONIC, ENERGY, INFORMATION, POSTAL, PLUMBING AND ALLIED SERVICES UNION OF AUSTRALIA
THIRD RESPONDENT
DAVID MIER
FOURTH RESPONDENT
MARK GRECH
FIFTH RESPONDENT
MICHAEL DOUGLAS
SIXTH RESPONDENT
MAXIM ELECTRICAL SERVICES (VIC) PTY LTD
SEVENTH RESPONDENT JUDGE: MARSHALL J
DATE OF ORDER: 27 OCTOBER 2005
WHERE MADE: MELBOURNE
THE COURT DECLARES THAT:
1. The second respondent contravened s 187AA of the Workplace Relations Act 1996 (Cth) when it paid wages to the sixth respondent, Brett McCullen, Paul Derrick, Anthony Page, Richard Noonan, Paul Grant, Ray Fenton, Hamish Preston and David Vella. 2. The second respondent committed a breach or non observance of the Walter J Pratt Pty Ltd and CEPU Enterprise Agreement 2002-2005 by failing to follow the steps detailed in cl 12 of the agreement in good faith and without reasonable delay, or at all. 3. The second respondent committed a breach or non observance of cl 7 of the Walter J Pratt Pty Ltd and CEPU Enterprise Agreement 2002-2005 by failing to follow the procedure set out in cl 18 of the Victorian Building Industry Agreement and by failing to attempt to reach agreement as soon as possible. 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