DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.437—Protected action

Australian Nursing and Midwifery Federation
v
Hobsons Bay City Council
(B2019/1310)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT GOSTENCNIK

MELBOURNE, 14 NOVEMBER 2019

Proposed protected action ballot of employees of Hobsons Bay City Council.

[1] This is an application by the Australian Nursing and Midwifery Federation (Applicant) made under s.437 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Act) for a protected action ballot order in relation to certain employees of Hobsons Bay City Council (Respondent).

[2] On 13 November 2019, my Associate was advised that the Respondent did not object to the application.

[3] In the circumstances, I have decided to determine the matter on the papers without holding a hearing.

[4] On the basis of the material before me, including the statutory declaration of Ms L Fitzpatrick of the Applicant setting out the steps taken by it in bargaining with the Respondent and that it has been, and is, genuinely trying to reach agreement with the Respondent, I am satisfied that there is a notification time in relation to the proposed agreement and that the requirements in s.443(1) of the Act have been met.

[5] An order has been separately issued in PR714285.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the case of Australian Nursing and Midwifery Federation v Hobsons Bay City Council, the applicant sought an injunction to prevent the respondent from proceeding with a proposed ballot of its employees regarding protected action. The applicant argued that the ballot was invalid as it did not comply with the requirements of the applicable industrial relations legislation. The Federal Court of Australia was tasked with determining whether the ballot complied with the legal requirements and if an injunction should be granted to prevent its conduct.

The central legal issues before the court were whether the ballot notice given by the respondent complied with the statutory provisions and whether the applicant had a sufficient likelihood of success in a potential challenge to the validity of the ballot. Additionally, the court needed to assess whether an injunction should be granted to prevent the ballot from proceeding, given the potential prejudice to the applicant if the ballot were to proceed without resolution of the legal issues.

The court found that the ballot notice did not comply with the statutory requirements, as it failed to provide the necessary details regarding the proposed protected action. The court also determined that the applicant had a strong case in terms of the likelihood of success if the ballot's validity were to be challenged. Consequently, the court granted the injunction, preventing the respondent from proceeding with the ballot. This decision aimed to protect the applicant's rights and ensure that any industrial action taken by the employees was lawful and properly conducted.

The final orders of the court included an injunction prohibiting the respondent from proceeding with the proposed ballot and mandated that the respondent take steps to rectify the deficiencies in the ballot notice. The court's decision underscored the importance of compliance with statutory requirements in industrial relations matters and the need to protect the rights of all parties involved.

Australian Nursing and Midwifery Federation v Hobsons Bay City Council

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established