High Court of Australia
High Court of Australia Gibbs, Stephen, Mason, Murphy and Aickin JJ. R v Isaac; Ex parte State Electricity Commission (Vic) [1978] HCA 33
ORDER Order nisi discharged.
Cur. adv. vult.
The following written judgments were delivered:—
Aug. 16 Gibbs J.
On or about 30th April 1970 the Municipal Officers' Association of Australia ("M.O.A.") served upon the State Electricity Commission of Victoria ("S.E.C.V."), the Electricity Trust of South Australia ("E.T.S.A.") and certain other electricity authorities a letter demanding that they should grant to their employees the salaries and conditions of service set out in a log of claims which was attached to the letter of demand. Amongst other things it was demanded that the ordinary hours of duty of persons employed in or in connexion with the operation of electricity undertakings conducted by the authorities should be thirty per week. The demands were not complied with and on 19th May 1970 M.O.A. notified the Conciliation and Arbitration Commission ("the Commission") of the existence of an industrial dispute between the M.O.A. and the authorities, including S.E.C.V. and E.T.S.A. On 8th June 1970 a Commissioner found that an industrial dispute existed in a number of States between M.O.A. and S.E.C.V. and E.T.S.A. and other authorities. On 18th October 1971, in part settlement of the dispute, a Commissioner made a consent award entitled the Electricity Trust of South Australia (Staff Conditions) Award, 1971 ("the E.T.S.A. Award") [1] . The S.E.C.V. did not appear before the Commission when this award was made and is not one of the persons on whom the award is intended to be binding (cl. 32). By cl. 5 of the award the ordinary hours of work for a day worker are to be thirty-seven and a half but there are exceptions (apparently wide in their scope) in the case of which the hours are to be forty. On 1st November 1976 M.O.A. made application for an order varying the E.T.S.A. Award, by, in effect, making the ordinary hours of work thirty-seven and a half in all cases. The application was numbered C. No. 3966 of 1976. On 14th January 1977 E.T.S.A. also made application to vary the E.T.S.A. Award; its application was numbered C. No. 5003 of 1977.
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