Cains v Jenkins

Case [1979] FCA 145


CATCHWORDS

Registered organisation - removol from office of branch secretary by committee - refusal to allow agent of branch secretary to be present - actual bias or reasonable apprehension of bias - whether denial of natural justice - Conciliation and Arbitration Act s.141

CAINS v. JENKINS & ORS

V. No. 25 of 1979

Coram: J. B. Sweeney, St John & Keely JJ.

Place: Sydney

Date: 20 December 1979

I N THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

-- )
1
VICTORIAN D I S T R I C T REGISTRY
) V. No. 25 of 1 9 7 9
)
INDUSTRIAL D I V I S I O N )
BETWEEN :  DAVID JAMES CAINS A p p e l l a n t
and
R e s p o n d e n t s

ORDER

JUDGES MAKING ORDER:  J . B . S w e e n e y , S t . John & K e e l y JJ.
DATE O F ORDER: 20 D e c e m b e r , 1 9 7 9
WHERE MADE:  SYDNEY
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:  A p p e a l be dismissed.

%

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA )
)
VICTORIAN DISTRICT REGISTRY ) )
INDUSTRIAL DIVISION 1

IN THE MATTER OF The Conclllation and Arbitration Act 1904

BETWEEN :

DAVID JAMES CAINS

Appellant

- AND :

'\
Respondents

J. B. SWEENEY J. ST. JOt l f i J.

An application by the claimant for a rule nlsi, pursuant to
Section 141 of the Conciliation and Arbitration Act 1904
(The Act), that the respondents perform or observe the rules

of the Victorian branch of a registered organization, namely
the Federated Confectioners' Association, by treating as null

and void the resolutions of the committee of management

(the committee) of that branch, at a meeting held on *

11 April, 1979, was discharged by Northrop J. on 26 June, 1979.

Those resolutions dismissed the appellant from his former office of Branch Secretary after he was found gullty of certain charges against him. Against such discharge an appeal by the claimant is brought to this Court. Denlal of natural justice by the committee was alleged before the learned Trial Judge.

Before consideration of the grounds of appeal it is convenient to summarize the relevant facts. The terminology of the criminal law seems to have been imported into this area, and,

for the sake of convenience,we use it. An election for offlce

bearers except those of Secretary and President was held in
late 1978. The appellant distributed election material in
different languages, including English, in which he urged

members of the branch "to keep Communist influence and

interference from other Unlons out of thls Union" by placlng

a cross agalnst the names of four of eight candidates for

election to the committee of management. The four names for

whom a vote was not recommended included Messrs Gempton and

Pannagopoulos who were in fact elected to office subsequently

/

in December, 1978.

Continue reading Cains v Jenkins

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
AGLC
Cains v Jenkins [1979] FCA 145
Case
[1979] FCA 145
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the case of Cains v Jenkins, the Federal Court of Australia dismissed an appeal brought by David James Cains against the decisions of a committee of the Federated Confectioners' Association. The committee had dismissed Cains from his position as Branch Secretary, finding him guilty of charges including misbehaviour and failure to follow instructions. Cains argued that the committee's decisions were marred by bias and a denial of natural justice, including the refusal to allow his agent to be present during the proceedings. The Court, however, found that the committee had followed proper procedures and that there was no actual bias influencing the decisions. The Court emphasised the distinction between statutory tribunals and consensual tribunals such as trade union committees, noting that the latter are often composed of members with pre-existing relationships to the parties involved, and that the law does not generally require disqualification based on mere suspicion of bias. The Court concluded that the committee's decisions were fair and in compliance with the principles of natural justice, and thus dismissed the appeal.

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

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.