Attorney-General (Queensland) v Riordan - [1995] IRCA 293

CATCHWORDS

INDUSTRIAL LAW - Application for prerogative relief against AUSTRALIAN INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS COMMISSION - JURISDICTION - DISPUTE FINDING based on non-compliance with log of claims - Amended finding after second log of claims - Whether claims made in logs were "plainly fanciful" so as to be incapable of giving rise to an industrial dispute - Whether Commission could properly have found that any dispute extended to Queensland employers - Onus of proof - Authorisation of log of claims - Whether service of second log terminates the dispute arising out of non-compliance with the first log - Whether claim for career path determined by the union was an "industrial matter".

Industrial Relations Act 1988 s.412

No QI 221 of 1994
ATTORNEY-GENERAL FOR THE STATE OF QUEENSLAND v THE HONOURABLE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT RIORDAN, AUSTRALIAN LIQUOR, HOSPITALITY and MISCELLANEOUS WORKERS UNION, ST JOHN AMBULANCE AUSTRALIA, AMBULANCE OFFICER TRAINING CENTRE VICTORIA

AND

No QI 252 of 1994
THE STATE OF VICTORIA and THE MINISTER FOR HEALTH FOR THE STATE OF VICTORIA v THE HONOURABLE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT JOSEPH MARTIN RIORDAN, AUSTRALIAN LIQUOR HOSPITALITY and MISCELLANEOUS WORKERS UNION

CORAM:    WILCOX CJ, NORTHROP AND SPENDER JJ
PLACE:    BRISBANE
DATE:     4 JULY 1995

IN THE INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS COURT)
OF AUSTRALIA ) No. QI 252 of 1994
QUEENSLAND DISTRICT REGISTRY )

BETWEEN:THE STATE OF VICTORIA and THE MINISTER FOR HEALTH FOR THE STATE OF VICTORIA

Applicant

AND:THE HONOURABLE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT JOSEPH MARTIN RIORDAN

First Respondent

AUSTRALIAN LIQUOR, HOSPITALITY and MISCELLANEOUS WORKERS UNION

Second Respondent

CORAM:    WILCOX CJ, NORTHROP & SPENDER JJ
PLACE:    BRISBANE
DATE:     4 JULY 1995

MINUTES OF ORDER

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

In the event that the applicants, the State of Victoria and the Minister for Health for the State of Victoria, wish to pursue the constitutional ground raised in the Notice of Motion and previously reserved, within 14 days of this order, they file and serve written submissions in support of that ground and the respondent, within a further 14 days, file and serve written submissions in response.

If no written submissions are filed within 14 days in accordance with order 1, at the expiration of the 14 day period the application stand dismissed.

Note:Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Industrial Relations Court Rules.

IN THE INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS COURT )
OF AUSTRALIA ) No. QI 221 of 1994
QUEENSLAND DISTRICT REGISTRY )

BETWEEN:ATTORNEY-GENERAL FOR THE STATE OF QUEENSLAND

Applicant

AND:THE HONOURABLE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT RIORDAN

First Respondent

AUSTRALIAN LIQUOR, HOSPITALITY and MISCELLANEOUS WORKERS UNION

Second Respondent

ST JOHN AMBULANCE AUSTRALIA

Third Respondent

AMBULANCE OFFICER TRAINING CENTRE VICTORIA

Fourth Respondent

CORUM:    WILCOX CJ, NORTHROP & SPENDER JJ
PLACE:    BRISBANE
DATE:     4 JULY 1995

MINUTES OF ORDER

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

In the event that the applicant, the Attorney-General for the State of Queensland, wishes to pursue the constitutional ground raised in the Notice of Motion and previously reserved, within 14 days of this order, he file and serve written submissions in support of that ground and the…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Attorney-General (Queensland) v Riordan and more:

Read every judgment in full
Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
Download judgments as PDF or Word

Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details

Case: [1995] IRCA 293
Decision Date: 04 July 1995

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Attorney-General for Queensland filed an application for prerogative relief against the Australian Industrial Relations Commission in the Federal Court. The dispute centred on the Commission's jurisdiction to make a dispute finding based on non-compliance with a log of claims, with subsequent amendments to the finding after a second log of claims was submitted. The central legal issues involved whether the claims made in the logs were "plainly fanciful" and therefore incapable of giving rise to an industrial dispute. This was in accordance with the Constitution and the Industrial Relations Act 1988. The Court needed to determine if the Commission had the authority to find that the log of claims in matter C No 33189 of 1993 was authorisedly made, and if the service of the demands in that matter brought to an end the dispute in matter C No 20689 of 1993.

The Court held that if no written submissions were filed within 14 days in accordance with the order, the application would stand dismissed. The logs of claims in matters C Nos. 20689 and 33189 of 1993 were considered fanciful and in reality were claims for increased wages, allowances and conditions of employment as determined by the Commission. These were incapable of creating an industrial dispute within the meaning of the Constitution and the Industrial Relations Act 1988. Alternatively, if the demands were capable of creating an industrial dispute, the service of the demands in matter C No 33189 of 1993 brought to an end the dispute in matter C No 20689 of 1993. There was no evidence upon which the Commission could find that the log of claims in matter C No 33189 of 1993 was authorisedly made.

The Court's decision was that the application was dismissed. The Court found that the logs of claims were fanciful and not capable of creating an industrial dispute, and that the Commission did not have the evidence to find that the second log of claims was authorisedly made. As a result, the Commission's jurisdiction to make a dispute finding was called into question. The logs of claims were not valid, and therefore, the Commission's decision to make a dispute finding was not supported by the evidence before it.

Orders

Orders of the court

Full text does not contain this section.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

WILCOX CJ

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Established by: WILCOX CJ

If no written submissions are filed within 14 days in accordance with order 1, at the expiration of the 14 day period the application stand dismissed. The logs of claims in matters C Nos. 20689 and 33189 of 1993 were fanciful and were in reality claims for increased wages, allowances and conditions of employment as determined by the Commission, and incapable of creating an industrial dispute within the meaning of the Constitution and the Industrial Relations Act 1988. Alternatively, if the demands were capable of creating an industrial dispute, the service of the demands in matter C No 33189 of 1993 brought to an end the dispute in matter C No. 20689 of 1993. There was no evidence upon which the Commission could find that the log of claims in matter C No. 33189 of 1993 was authorisedly made." To preserve in the short term the consistency in the rates of pay for a qualified ambulance officer which currently exists. The move towards a federal award/or awards is consistent with the long term objective of ambulance unions to introduce a new and revamped classification structure. The rejection by employers nationally to negotiate a new classification structure. To facilitate greater efficiency in terms of joint bargaining by unions or state branches of unions with employers from various states,and; Is consistent with the greater degree of activity nationally by Ambulance unions to standardise practices with respect to occupational health and safety and training issues." THAT there is in existence an industrial dispute within the meaning of the said Act between the ALHMWU, the Ambulance Employees Association and the employers in those States and the Northern Territory who operate the relevant ambulance service. THAT the subject matter which forms the said dispute relates to wages and other conditions of employment as specified in the log of claims served by the ALHMWU and the AEAV on 10 December 1993, in matter C No 33189 of 1993, appended hereto. THAT the dispute exists in the health and welfare services industry in the State of Western Australia, Queensland, Victoria, South Australia and the Northern Territory." THAT there is in existence an industrial dispute within the meaning of the said Act between the ALHMWU, the Ambulance Employees Association and the employers in those States and the Northern Territory who operate the relevant ambulance service. THAT the subject matter which forms the said dispute relates to wages and other conditions of employment as specified in the log of claims served by the ALHMWU and the AEAV on 10 December 1993, in matter C No 33189 of 1993, appended hereto. THAT the dispute exists in the health and welfare services industry in the State of Western Australia, Queensland, Victoria, South Australia and the Northern Territory."