Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union v BHP Coal Pty Ltd [2014] FCA 1431 Citation: Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union v BHP Coal Pty Ltd [2014] FCA 1431
Parties: CONSTRUCTION, FORESTRY, MINING AND ENERGY UNION v BHP COAL PTY LTD
File number: QUD 657 of 2014
Judge: LOGAN J
Date of judgment: 12 December 2014
Catchwords: INDUSTRIAL LAW – clause in enterprise bargaining agreement requiring consultation in relation to possibility and management of workplace redundancies – application for interlocutory injunctive relief – question of whether serious question to be tried as to whether employer breached clause and thereby breached Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) – question of the balance of convenience Held: serious question to be tried as to failure by employer to consult re possibility of redundancies but the balance of convenience favoured refusal of interlocutory injunction – application dismissed
Legislation: Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) ss 50, 542
Cases cited: Australian Broadcasting Corporation v O'Neill (2006) 227 CLR 57 cited Beecham Group Ltd v Bristol Laboratories Pty Ltd (1968) 118 CLR 618 cited Businessworld Computers Pty Ltd v Australian Telecommunications Commission (1988) 82 ALR 499 considered Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia v QR Limited (2010) 268 ALR 514 followed Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union v BHP Coal Pty Ltd [2014] FWC 2062 considered Films Rover International Ltd v Cannon Film Sales Ltd [1987] 1 WLR 670 considered Pakenham Upper Fruit Company Limited v Crosby (1924) 35 CLR 386 considered Parmalat Australia Pty Ltd v VIP Plastic Packaging Pty Ltd (2013) 210 FCR 1 considered QR Ltd v Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union (2010) 204 IR 142 cited Queensland v Australian Telecommunications Commission (1985) 59 ALJR 562 cited Re Consultation clause in Modern Awards (2013) 238 IR 282 cited Telstra Corporation Ltd v First Netcom Pty Ltd (1997) 78 FCR 132 cited
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