Legal Research
Cases
Bailey v Krantz

Bailey v Krantz

Case [1985] FCA 370 16 July 1985

Corporate Law & Governance

No judgment structure available for this case.

Type to search within this case.

Re: JAMES LESLIE BAILEY
And: HARRY DAVID KRANTZ AND ORS
S.A. No. 1 of 1983
Industrial Law
13 IR 339

COURT

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
SOUTH AUSTRALIA DISTRICT REGISTRY
INDUSTRIAL DIVISION
Gray J.

CATCHWORDS

Industrial law - registered organizations - performance and observance of rules - registration under South Australian law - whether registration of branch or separate association - whether state law can incorporate branch - inconsistency with law of Commonwealth - whether incorporation provisions severable - whether branch defunct - entitlement to funds and property - whether property "vested" in organisation - whether equitable defences available - validation by lapse of time - whether validation leads to "substantial injustice".

Commonwealth of Australia Constitution, s. 109,

Conciliation and Arbitration Act 1904, s. 141, s. 140, s. 133A, s. 171F, s. 171G, s. 132, s. 41, s. 65, s. 66, s. 67, s. 136, s. 158D, s. 139, s. 171C,

Conciliation and Arbitration Act Regulations s. 115, s. 127

Industrial Conciliation and Arbitration Act 1972 (S.A.) s. 5, s. 137, s. 117,

Real Property Act 1886

Industrial Arbitration Act 1912 (S.A.), s. 3

Industrial Arbitration Act Amendment Act 1915 (S.A.) s. 2, s. 8, s. 9, s. 10,

Trade Union Act 1876 (S.A.)

Industrial Code 1920 (S.A.) s. 3,

Industrial Code 1967 (S.A.) s. 5, s. 139, s. 150,

Trade Union Act 1881 (N.S.W.)

Industrial Arbitration Act 1940 (N.S.W.) s. 8,

Trade Union Act 1915 (Qld.)

Industrial Arbitration Act 1916 (Qld)

Associations Incorporation Act 1956-1965 (S.A.),

Judiciary Act 1903, s. 78B,

Real Property Act 1886 (S.A.),

Trustee Act 1936 (S.A.) s. 5,

Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 s. 23

Moore v. Doyle (1969) 15 F.L.R. 59,

Williams v. Hursey (1959) 103 C.L.R. 30,

Allen v. Sideris (1984) 9 I.R. 68,

Steuart v. Oliver (1971) 17 F.L.R. 99,

Allingham v. The Australian Workers' Union (1972) Qd R 218,

Egan v. Harradine (1975) 25 F.L.R. 336,

In Re Wages and Working Conditions of Persons Employed as Clerks

and Clerical Workers and Office Workers (1941) S.A.S.R. 65,

Ryan v. Federated Clerks Union of Australia (South Australian Branch) (1951) S.A.S.R. 249,

Egan v. Shop Distributive and Allied Employees' Federation of Australia, New South Wales (1979) 143 C.L.R. 325.

HEARING

MELBOURNE
#DATE 16:7:1985

ORDER

1. The motions the subject of the Notice of Motion dated 31st January 1985 are dismissed.

2. The motions the subject of the Notice of Motion dated 21st February 1985 are dismissed.

3. Paragraphs (a), (b), (c), (d), (e), (f), (g), and (h) (where second appearing) of the Rule to Show Cause are discharged.

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

JUDGE1

This proceeding was commenced by Rule to Show Cause granted on 23rd March 1983. In substance, the relief sought is pursuant to s. 141 of the Conciliation and Arbitration Act 1904 ("the federal Act"), being orders for the performance and observance of the rules of the Federated Clerks Union of Australia ("the Union"), an organization…

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.

Continue reading Bailey v Krantz

Details

AGLC: Bailey L.J. v. Krantz, H.D. & Ors [1985] FCA 370 (13 IR 339)
Case: [1985] FCA 370
Decision Date: 16 JULY 1985

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Bailey v Krantz is a case before the Federal Court of Australia concerning the registration of a trade union branch under South Australian law. The dispute arises from the registration of a branch of the Australian Manufacturing Workers Union, and whether this registration was valid under state law. The central issue was whether the branch was a separate association or part of a larger organisation, and whether state law could incorporate a branch in a way that was inconsistent with the Commonwealth law. Another legal issue was whether the incorporation provisions could be severed from the rest of the law, and if the branch could be considered defunct, which would affect the entitlement to funds and property. Additionally, the court examined whether the property was "vested" in the organisation, and if there were any equitable defences available. The case also explored the possibility of validating the registration by the lapse of time, and whether such validation would lead to substantial injustice.

The court found that the registration of the union branch under South Australian law was inconsistent with Commonwealth law, and therefore invalid. The court held that the incorporation provisions were not severable from the rest of the law, and that the branch could not be considered defunct. The court also ruled that the property was not "vested" in the organisation, and that there were no equitable defences available. The court found that the validation of the registration by the lapse of time would not lead to substantial injustice. Ultimately, the court dismissed the motions and discharged the paragraphs of the Rule to Show Cause.

The final orders of the court were to dismiss the motions related to the case, discharge specific paragraphs of the Rule to Show Cause, and direct the settlement and entry of orders in accordance with Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules. This case highlights the complex interplay between state and Commonwealth law in the context of union registrations, and the potential consequences of inconsistent legal frameworks. The court's decision has implications for the validity of union registrations and the distribution of funds and property in such cases.

Orders

Orders of the court

1. The motions the subject of the Notice of Motion dated 31st January 1985 are dismissed.

2. The motions the subject of the Notice of Motion dated 21st February 1985 are dismissed.

3. Paragraphs (a), (b), (c), (d), (e), (f), (g), and (h) (where second appearing) of the Rule to Show Cause are discharged.

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

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

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.

Actions

Citations

Bailey L.J. v. Krantz, H.D. & Ors [1985] FCA 370 (13 IR 339)

Most Recent Citation

Lewis, B.L. & Ors v Maynes, J.P. & Ors Lannigan, G.J. v Lewis, B.L [1988] FCA 695

Cases Citing This Decision

United Firefighters' Union of Australia v United Firefighters' Union of Australia, Union of Employees, Queensland [2022] FCA 145
Citation 1

…strial Relations Act 2016 (Qld) Cases cited: Australian Education Union v Lawler [2008] FCAFC 135; (2008) 169 FCR 327 Bailey v Krantz (1985) 13 IR 339 Brown v Health Services Union [2012] FCA 644; (2012) 205 FCR 548 Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of…
Australian Workers' Union v Registered Organisations Commissioner (No 9) [2019] FCA 1671
Citation 2

…Work Australia (2012) 246 CLR 117 Bailey v Krantz (1985) 13 IR 339 Bread Manufacturers of NSW v Evans (1980) 180 CLR 404 Briginshaw v Briginshaw (1938) 60 CLR 336 Caratti v Commissioner of the Australian Federal Police (2017) 257 FCR 166 Commissioner for Corporate Affairs v X and Y [1987] VR 460 Communications, Electrica…
McDonald v Commissioner of Police, NSW Police [2019] NSWCATAD 66
Citation 3 (Para 92)

…n the Tribunal's view that the applicant was using the "mosaic effect" identified in Department of Health v Jephcott (1985) 8 FCR 85; 62 ALR 421; [1985] FCA 370 in order to identify and confirm his suspicion as to the true identity of police informants. The mosaic effect describes the situation where the applican…
Independent Education Union of Australia [2018] FWCD 1534
Citation 4

…e for example Cameron v Duncan (1965) 8 FLR 148; Troja v Australasian Meat Industry Employees’ Union (Victorian Branch) (1978) 46 FLR 340, 346-348; Bailey v Krantz (1985) 13 IR 339, 381-2.…
Jackson v P/T Constructions WA Pty Ltd [2015] FCCA 1014
Citation 5

…11) 205 IR 392 Australian Securities & Investments Commission v Cassimatis [2013] FCA 641; (2013) 220 FCR 256; (2013) 302 ALR 671; (2013) 94 ACSR 623 Bailey v Krantz (1984) 55 ALR 345 Beck & Anor v Spalla & Anor [2005] FCAFC 82; (2005) 142 FCR 555 Board of Bendigo Institute of Technical and Further Education v Barclay [2…
Re Lobo and Department of Immigration and Citizenship [2011] AATA 705
Citation 6

…wealth [1988] HCA 63; (1988) 166 CLR 79 Department of Agriculture and Rural Affairs v Binnie [1989] VR 836 (Binnie) Department of Health v Jephcott [1985] FCA 370; (1985) 8 FCR 85; 62 ALR 421; 9 ALD 35 Deta Nominees Pty Ltd v Viscount Plastic Products Pty Ltd [1979] VR 167 Do Carmo v Ford Excavations Pty Ltd [198…
Re Matthews and Australian Securities and Investments Commission [2010] AATA 649
Citation 7

…Pty Ltd [1987] FCA 266; (1987) 14 FCR 434; 13 ALD 254 Danvers v Commissioner for Railways (NSW) (1969) 122 CLR 529 Department of Health v Jephcott [1985] FCA 370; (1985) 8 FCR 85; 62 ALR 421; 9 ALD 35 Drake v Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs (1979) 2 ALD 60; 24 ALR 577 Director of Public Prosecutions…
Welsh v Allblend Holdings Pty Ltd (No. 2) [2010] FMCA 377
Citation 8

…ral v R (1957) 95 CLR 529 Australian Communications and Media Authority v Mobile Gate Ltd a company incorporated in Hong Kong (No. 3) [2009] FCA 1154 Bailey v Krantz & Ors (1984) 55 ALR 345 DJL v Central Authority (2000) 201 CLR 226; [2000] HCA 17 Henderson v Pioneer Homes Pty Ltd (1979) 38 FLR 460 Henderson v Pioneer Homes Pt…
Crowther-Wilkinson v NSW Police Force [2009] NSWADTAP 49
Citation 9

…on . A source of information is confidential if it is provided under an express or implied pledge of confidentiality: Department of Health v Jephcott [1985] FCA 370; (1985) 8 FCR 85 per Forster J at 89. In order to determine whether that is the case all the relevant circumstances need to be taken into account: Re…
In the matter of an application by Saska Poposki for an Inquiry in relation to an election for offices in the Automotive, Food, Metals, Engineering, Printing and Kindred Industries Union [2000] FCA 1190
Citation 10 (Para 21)

…ganisation does not automatically cease to be a member of the organisation unless there is some provision in the rules which compels that result. See Bailey v Krantz (1985) 13 IR 339 at 381 to 382 where some of the authorities are conveniently referred to by Gray J. See also Ransley v APSA (1985) 12 IR 55 at 64 per Gray…
Sutton v Sharp (No 3) [2000] IRCA 1
Citation 11 (Para 21)

…Reliance is placed on the observation of Gray J in Bailey v Krantz (1985) 13 IR 339 at 377: “The rules of a federally registered organisation derive their force and effect from the federal Act. See s 141 of the federal Act [ the Conciliation and Arbitration Act 1904] and R v Commonwealth Court of Conciliation and Arbitra…
Rennie, Gordon Andrew v Curley, Sean [1997] FCA 765
Citation 12

…hird respondent which it appears was joined to allow it to make any submissions which it desired to make. A similar course was permitted by Gray J in Bailey v Krantz (1984) 55 ALR 345, 354. Apart from the making of the six orders referred to above, the Court will otherwise discharge the amended rule to show cause.…
Re McJannet; Ex parte Minister for Employment, Training and Industrial Relations (Q) [1995] HCA 31
Citation 13

…19 See Bailey v Krantz (1985) 13 IR 339; Frizziero v Rice (1992) 36 FCR 449; 110 ALR 549; cf Sharpe v Goodhew (1990) 96 ALR 251.…
McJannet v White [1992] FCA 848
Citation 14

…Bailey v Krantz (1985) 13 IR 339…
Sharpe v Goodhew [1990] FCA 272
Citation 15

…It was held in Bailey v. Krantz (1985) 13 IR 339 that a State law providing for incorporation of a branch of a federal union was inconsistent with the provisions of the Conciliation and Arbitration Act 1904. The reasons given included, in substance, that the federal union might wish to abolish or ch…
Lewis, B.L. & Ors v Maynes, J.P. & Ors Lannigan, G.J. v Lewis, B.L [1988] FCA 695
Citation 16

…of the rules intended to distinguish between funds of a branch and funds held at the national level. On this basis, makes it clear that, notwithstanding that a branch may hold funds, they are funds which are owned by the sub-rule (1) Union. Comments probable purpose, were made in Bailey v. Krantz (1…

See all citing cases →

Cases Cited

Rolph v Transport Workers Union of Australia [1991] HCATrans 203
Citation 1

…The other important matter to bear in mind is that s. 171G is concerned not with substantial injustice which might be said to flow from the original act validated by s. 171F, but with substantial injustice which might be said to flow from the operation of s. 171F after the lapse of four years. See R…
Scott v Jess [1984] FCA 322
Citation 2

…Some of the orders sought in the Rule to Show Cause, which are summarized in Bailey v. Krantz (1984) 55 A.L.R. 345 at page 347, are in general terms, requiring certain of the Respondents to comply with the rules. It is undesirable that orders in these general terms be made; the federal Act does not …
Cook v Crawford [1982] FCA 133
Citation 3

…The making of orders under s. 141 is, ultimately, a matter for the discretion of the Court. If the circumstances do not warrant an order, no order need be made. The normal equitable rules as to the refusal of relief do not, however, apply. The considerations which led the Court to refuse relief whic…
Williams v Hursey [1959] HCA 51
Citation 4

…Williams v. Hursey (1959) 103 C.L.R. 30,…

Legislation Cited

Conciliation and Arbitration Act 1904 (Cth) 141
2 mentions
Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) 23
2 mentions
Industrial Arbitration Act 1912 (WA) 3
2 mentions
Industrial Conciliation and Arbitration Act 1972 (SA) 5
2 mentions
Associations Incorporation Act 1956 (ACT)
1 mention
Industrial Arbitration Act 1916 (Qld)
1 mention
Industrial Arbitration Act 1940 (NSW) 8
1 mention
Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth) 78B
1 mention
Real Property Act 1886 (SA)
1 mention
Trade Union Act 1881 (NSW)
1 mention
Trustee Act 1936 (SA) 5
1 mention