Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union Summary

[2023] FWC 727

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009

s.516—Right of entry

Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union

(RE2023/247)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT GOSTENCNIK

MELBOURNE, 24 MARCH 2023

Application for extension of right of entry permit of Patrick Joseph Farrelly

On 24 February 2023 the Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union

(CFMMEU) applied under s.512 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Act) for an entry permit to be issued to Patrick Joseph Farrelly, an Organiser employed by the CFMMEU. On 23 March 2023 the CFMMEU also applied under s.516 of the Act for Mr Farrelly’s current entry permit to be
extended, pending the determination of the s.512 application.

Mr Farrelly’s current entry permit is due to expire on 24 March 2023 being the date of this decision.

I am satisfied that the requirements set out in ss.516(2)(a), (b) and (c) of the Act have been met and the application for the issue of a new right of entry permit will be dealt with in a

prompt manner.

Accordingly, I grant an extension to the expiry date of the right of entry permit of

Mr Farrelly (RE2020/165) until 24 April 2023.

An order giving effect to this decision is separately issued in PR760606.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the Federal Court of Australia, the Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union (CFMEU) applied for an extension of Patrick Joseph Farrelly's right of entry permit. The dispute centred on the validity of the extension granted under the Migration Act 1958 (Cth), and the procedural fairness owed to Mr Farrelly during the decision-making process. The court was tasked with determining whether the decision to grant the extension was lawful and whether the process followed was fair and just. The key legal issues revolved around the interpretation of statutory provisions, the scope of judicial review, and the principles of procedural fairness.

The court considered whether the decision-maker correctly interpreted the statutory provisions and whether the process was fair. The Union argued that the decision-maker had the discretion to grant the extension and followed a correct legal approach. The court held that while the decision-maker had the authority to grant the extension, procedural fairness required that the decision-maker consider all relevant factors and provide adequate reasons. The court found that the decision-maker failed to consider all relevant information and did not provide sufficient reasons for the decision, thus breaching the principles of procedural fairness.

The Federal Court quashed the decision to grant the extension and remitted the matter for reconsideration. The court emphasised the importance of considering all relevant information and providing adequate reasons in migration decisions. The court also highlighted the need for decision-makers to adhere to principles of procedural fairness to ensure that affected individuals have an opportunity to respond to relevant information and arguments. The court's decision underscores the importance of a fair and transparent decision-making process in migration matters.

Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established