Australian Building and Construction Commissioner v Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union and Ors (No.3)
Case
•
[2018] FCCA 34
•12 January 2018
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Australian Building And Construction Commissioner v Construction, Forestry, Mining And Energy Union and Ors (No.3) [2018] FCCA 34
[2018] FCCA 34
12 January 2018
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The Australian Building and Construction Commissioner (ABCC) brought proceedings against the Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union (CFMMEU) and several of its officials. The dispute concerned allegations of unlawful industrial action and coercion in contravention of the *Building and Construction Industry Improvement Act 2005* (Cth) (BCII Act). The proceedings were heard in the Federal Court of Australia before Judge Manousaridis.
The primary legal issue before the Court was whether the actions of the CFMMEU and its officials constituted unlawful coercion and/or unlawful industrial action as defined by the BCII Act. Specifically, the Court had to determine if the respondents had engaged in conduct that threatened, intimidated, or coerced persons engaged in building and construction work, or if they had organised or instigated industrial action that was not permitted under the Act.
Judge Manousaridis found that the CFMMEU and its officials had engaged in conduct that contravened the BCII Act. The Court reasoned that the evidence demonstrated a pattern of behaviour by the union and its representatives that involved threats and intimidation directed at contractors and employees to compel them to take certain actions or refrain from taking others. This conduct was found to be in direct breach of the prohibitions against coercion and unlawful industrial action contained within the Act. The Court applied the principles of statutory interpretation to the relevant provisions of the BCII Act, concluding that the conduct of the respondents fell squarely within the scope of the prohibited actions.
The Court ordered that the CFMMEU and its officials pay pecuniary penalties for their contraventions of the BCII Act.
The primary legal issue before the Court was whether the actions of the CFMMEU and its officials constituted unlawful coercion and/or unlawful industrial action as defined by the BCII Act. Specifically, the Court had to determine if the respondents had engaged in conduct that threatened, intimidated, or coerced persons engaged in building and construction work, or if they had organised or instigated industrial action that was not permitted under the Act.
Judge Manousaridis found that the CFMMEU and its officials had engaged in conduct that contravened the BCII Act. The Court reasoned that the evidence demonstrated a pattern of behaviour by the union and its representatives that involved threats and intimidation directed at contractors and employees to compel them to take certain actions or refrain from taking others. This conduct was found to be in direct breach of the prohibitions against coercion and unlawful industrial action contained within the Act. The Court applied the principles of statutory interpretation to the relevant provisions of the BCII Act, concluding that the conduct of the respondents fell squarely within the scope of the prohibited actions.
The Court ordered that the CFMMEU and its officials pay pecuniary penalties for their contraventions of the BCII Act.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Employment Law
-
Administrative Law
-
Civil Procedure
Legal Concepts
-
Judicial Review
-
Procedural Fairness
-
Natural Justice
-
Standing
-
Remedies
-
Abuse of Process
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Most Recent Citation
Port Macquarie-Hastings Council v Mansfield [2018] NSWLEC 107
Cases Citing This Decision
3
Australian Building and Construction Commissioner v Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union and Ors (No.6)
[2018] FCCA 2134
Australian Building & Construction Commissioner v CFMEU & Ors (No.5)
[2018] FCCA 1100
Port Macquarie-Hastings Council v Mansfield
[2018] NSWLEC 107
Cases Cited
4
Statutory Material Cited
3
Bengalla Mining Co Pty Ltd v Barclay Mowlem Construction Ltd
[2001] NSWSC 93
In the matter of One.Tel Ltd (in liq) - SingTel Optus Pty Ltd v Weston
[2010] NSWSC 1491
Wong v Sklavos
[2014] FCAFC 120