Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
McDermott Australia Pty Ltd v Australian Workers' Union [2011] FCA 303 Citation: McDermott Australia Pty Ltd v Australian Workers' Union [2011] FCA 303
Parties: MCDERMOTT AUSTRALIA PTY LTD (ACN 002 736 352) v THE AUSTRALIAN WORKERS' UNION, JEFFREY SHARP, JOSEPH PACE, JAMES GORE and JOSEPH SCHEMBRI
File number: VID 234 of 2011
Judge: DODDS-STREETON J
Date of judgment: 13 April 2011
Catchwords: INDUSTRIAL LAW – application for injunction to restrain respondents from engaging in industrial action – prima facie case that the second to fifth respondents had encouraged or directed the industrial action – insufficient evidence to establish their conduct identified with the first respondent – significant daily loss resulting from the industrial action – injunction granted against the second to fifth respondents
Legislation: Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth), ss 408, 417(1), 417 (3) and (4), 421, 545(1) and (2)
Cases cited: Australian Broadcasting Corporation v O'Neill (2006) 227 CLR 57 referred to Beecham Group Ltd v Bristol Laboratories Pty Ltd (1968) 118 CLR 618 referred to CPSU, The Community and Public Sector Union v Commonwealth of Australia [2006] FCAFC 176 referred to Transfield Construction Pty Ltd v AFMEPKIU [2002] FCA 1413 referred to Amcor Packaging (Australia) Pty Ltd v Automotive, Food, Metals, Engineering and Kindred Industries Union [2002] FCA 127 referred to
Date of hearing: 27 March 2011
Date of last submissions: 27 March 2011
Place: Melbourne
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