Bourne v Campbell

Case [1999] FCA 1522


FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Bourne v Campbell [1999] FCA 1522

INDUSTRIAL LAW – inquiry into alleged irregularities in the election of the president of the New South Wales Branch of the Australian Hotels Association – whether threat by Chief Executive Officer to resign upon re-election of applicant prevented or hindered the full and free recording of votes by certain delegates – whether actions of Chief Executive Officer to advise voting delegates of his intention to resign was without any lawful authority or excuse

Workplace Relations Act 1996 (Cth), ss 4(1), 218, 219, 222, 223, 315(2)

Smith v Oldham [1912] 15 CLR 355, referred to
Evan v Crichton-Brown [1981] 147 CLR 169, referred to
The Queen v Gray; ex parte Marsh [1985] 157 CLR 351, applied
Re Collins; ex parte Hockings [1989] 167 CLR 522, applied
Re Davidson [1990-] 22 FCR 449, referred to
Re Ivory [1993] 41 FCR 267, referred to
Re Bailey; Re Transport Workers Union of Australia (Vic Branch) [1997] 79 IR 1, referred to

ROBERT JAMES THOMAS BOURNE v MICHAEL CAMPBELL & ORS

N 751 OF 1999

EINFELD J
5 NOVEMBER 1999

SYDNEY


IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY

N 751 OF 1999

BETWEEN:

ROBERT JAMES THOMAS BOURNE
Applicant

AND:

MICHAEL CAMPBELL & ORS
Respondents

JUDGE:

EINFELD J

DATE OF ORDER:

5 NOVEMBER 1999

WHERE MADE:

SYDNEY

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1.the inquiry into the election of the President of the New South Wales Branch of the Australian Hotels Association on 9 February 1999 be terminated

2.the application for an inquiry be dismissed with costs

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


IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY

N 751 OF 1999

BETWEEN:

ROBERT JAMES THOMAS BOURNE
Applicant

AND:

MICHAEL CAMPBELL & ORS
Respondents

JUDGE:

EINFELD J

DATE:

5 NOVEMBER 1999

PLACE:

SYDNEY

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

  1. By application dated 4 August 1999 Robert James Thomas Bourne, a member of the New South Wales branch (the branch) of the Australian Hotels Association, sought an inquiry into alleged irregularities in the election of President of the branch held on 9 February 1999.  In the election, Bourne, the outgoing President, was defeated by 33 votes to 23 by John  Thorpe.  The application alleged that from approximately October 1998 to the date of the election, David Charles, the branch’s Chief Executive Officer since 1995, had been advising members of the branch Council that if Bourne was re-elected president, he, Charles, would resign his position as Chief Executive.  In November and December 1998, Bourne in his capacity as branch President told Charles that he had heard that Charles was “interfering in the election process” and cautioned him against continuing to do so.  Charles denied the allegation.  As late as the morning of the ballot, Charles was re-emphasising to voting delegates his intention to resign if Bourne succeeded.  It is at the heart of Bourne’s assertions in…

Continue reading Bourne v Campbell

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
AGLC
Bourne v Campbell [1999] FCA 1522
Case
[1999] FCA 1522
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Bourne sought to challenge the election of the President of the New South Wales Branch of the Australian Hotels Association on 9 February 1999, which was presided over by Campbell. The Federal Court of Australia was tasked with resolving the dispute.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether there were grounds to initiate an inquiry into the election process. Bourne needed to establish that irregularities or procedural errors occurred during the election that warranted an inquiry. The court was also required to determine if Bourne had standing to challenge the election and whether his application was brought within the appropriate timeframe.

The court found that Bourne did not provide sufficient evidence of irregularities or procedural errors in the election process. Bourne's application was dismissed because it was deemed to be without merit. The court further ruled that Bourne did not have standing to challenge the election, and his application was filed beyond the appropriate timeframe. Consequently, the court ordered the termination of the inquiry into the election and dismissed Bourne's application with costs.

The court's final orders included the termination of the inquiry into the election and the dismissal of Bourne's application, with Bourne to bear the costs of the proceedings. The settlement and entry of these orders were governed by Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.

Orders

Orders of the court

1. the inquiry into the election of the President of the New South Wales Branch of the Australian Hotels Association on 9 February 1999 be terminated

2. the application for an inquiry be dismissed with costs

Note: Settlement and entry of orders are 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

EINFELD J

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Established by: EINFELD J

Full text does not contain this section.