Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Blomfield v Bechtel Construction (Australia) Pty Ltd (No 2) [2013] FCA 228 Citation: Blomfield v Bechtel Construction (Australia) Pty Ltd (No 2) [2013] FCA 228
Parties: BENNETT BLOMFIELD, JOSEPH MUNRO and CAMERON TOWNSLEY v BECHTEL CONSTRUCTION (AUSTRALIA) PTY LTD
File number: QUD 683 of 2012
Judge: LOGAN J
Date of judgment: 7 March 2013
Legislation: Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) Work Health and Safety Act 2011 (Qld)
Date of hearing: 4 - 7 March 2013
Place: Brisbane
Division: FAIR WORK DIVISION
Category: No Catchwords
Number of paragraphs: 8
Counsel for the Applicants: Mr WL Friend SC
Solicitor for the Applicants: Hall Payne Lawyers
Counsel for the Respondent: Mr J Murdoch SC with Mr CD Murdoch
Solicitor for the Respondent: Norton Rose Australia
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA QUEENSLAND DISTRICT REGISTRY FAIR WORK DIVISION QUD 683 of 2012
BETWEEN: BENNETT BLOMFIELD
First Applicant
JOSEPH MUNRO
Second Applicant
CAMERON TOWNSLEY
Third Applicant
AND: BECHTEL CONSTRUCTION (AUSTRALIA) PTY LTD
Respondent
JUDGE: LOGAN J DATE OF ORDER: 7 MARCH 2013 WHERE MADE: BRISBANE
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1. Leave is granted for the applicants to discontinue their application. 2. Leave is granted for the respondent to discontinue its cross-claim. 3. No order as to costs. Note: Entry of orders is dealt with in Rule 39.32 of the Federal Court Rules 2011
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA QUEENSLAND DISTRICT REGISTRY FAIR WORK DIVISION QUD 683 of 2012
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