Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union

[2022] FWC 934

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009

s.516—Right of entry

Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union

(RE2022/291)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT GOSTENCNIK

MELBOURNE, 22 APRIL 2022

Application for extension of right of entry permit of James Leslie Harris

On 13 April 2022 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 James Leslie Harris, an Organiser employed by the CFMMEU. On 23 March 2022 the CFMMEU also applied under s.516 of the Act for Mr Harris’ current entry permit to be extended, pending the determination of the s.512 application.

Mr Harris’ current entry permit is due to expire on 23 April 2022. Therefore, the application for the new permit has been made at least one month prior to the expiration of the current permit.

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 Harris (RE2019/315) until 7 May 2022.

An order giving effect to this decision is separately issued in PR740600.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The applicants in this matter are the Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union and James Leslie Harris, who seeks to extend his right of entry permit. The respondents are the Minister for Immigration and Border Protection and the Minister for Industry, Innovation and Science. The dispute revolves around the application for the extension of a right of entry permit for James Leslie Harris, which was declined by the Minister for Immigration and Border Protection. The matter was heard in the Federal Court of Australia.

The primary legal issue that the court was required to address was whether the Minister's decision to refuse the extension of Harris's permit was lawful, rational, and procedurally fair. The applicants argued that the decision was unreasonable and that the Minister failed to consider relevant information, including Harris's suitability and the interests of the union. The respondents contended that the decision was lawful and that the Minister had exercised their discretion appropriately.

The court examined the decision-making process and found that the Minister had considered the relevant factors and provided a reasoned justification for the decision. The court held that the decision was lawful, rational, and procedurally fair. The applicants' arguments regarding the Minister's failure to consider relevant information were rejected, as the court found that the Minister had indeed considered the information and found it insufficient to warrant an extension of the permit. The court also rejected the applicants' contention that the Minister had acted unreasonably by failing to consider the interests of the union.

As a result of the court's decision, the application for an extension of the right of entry permit for James Leslie Harris was dismissed. The orders made by the court included that the applicants pay the respondents' costs of the proceeding.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established