Leading Age Services Australia NSW-ACT [2016] NSWIC 7

Industrial Court New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Leading Age Services Australia NSW-ACT [2016] NSWIC 7 Hearing dates: 24 May 2016 Date of orders: 25 May 2016 Decision date: 01 July 2016 Before: Walton J - President Decision: In the circumstances, orders affecting the validation of casual appointments to the committee and the validation of acts and decisions in the management and administration of the applicant and/or office bearers of the applicant during the period of 1 February 2015 to 21 March 2016 are appropriate.

Validating amended rule 29, however, would have entailed validating a rule that contravened a provision of the Act, namely s 242(2). Thus, an order to that effect would have perpetuated one of the deficiencies of amended rule 29. In order to prevent further invalidities deriving from reliance on amended rule 29, the Court resolved to order that rule 29 be amended in order to ensure its compliance with s 242(2) of the Act. Catchwords: Registered organisation – application for determination of invalidity and orders to validate actions of applicant – reasons for orders made pursuant to s 288(3) – alleged invalidity arose from applicant altering its rules – purported rule change increased term of office bearers and altered arrangements for casual appointments to committee – consent of Industrial Registrar not sought under s 245 – rule change contravened s 242(2) – office bearers purported to hold office past date when elections due – purported office bearers acted for applicant past that date – appointment of casual vacancies by purported office bearers in contravention of applicant's rules – principles for finding of invalidity and orders under s 288 – invalidity found in management or administration of the applicant – invalidity found in the alteration of the rules of the applicant – invalidity found in office bearers acting for applicant after elections were due in February 2015 – invalidity found in the appointment of four casual vacancies – Court satisfied that no substantial injustice done to applicant, members or creditors of the applicant or persons dealing with applicant if orders are made pursuant to s 288(3) – adequate notice of proceedings given to members – no contradictor present in proceedings – orders made under s 288(3) would assist applicant in operating effectively and legally. Legislation Cited: Conciliation and Arbitration Act 1904 (Cth) Industrial Relations Act 1996 Cases Cited: Allen and Ford v Laragy and Others (1975) 7 ALR 261 Liquor, Hospitality and Miscellaneous Union, New South Wales Branch [2006] NSWIRComm 244 Squires v. Stephenson & Ors (1983) 4 IR 84 The MEAA NSW. Application by The MEAA NSW for a determination of the question of an invalidity under s 288 of the Industrial Relations Act 1996 [2009] NSWIRComm 80 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Leading Age Services Australia NSW-ACT (Applicant) Representation: Counsel: Bruce Miles (Applicant)