Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union v DP World Sydney Ltd
Case
•
[2019] FCAFC 99
•20 June 2019
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union v DP World Sydney Ltd [2019] FCAFC 99
[2019] FCAFC 99
20 June 2019
CaseChat Overview and Summary
In the matter of Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union v DP World Sydney Ltd, the Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union (CFMMEU) sought to appeal the Full Bench’s decision regarding the granting of an extension of time under section 443(5) of the Fair Work Act for the giving of notice of industrial action. The CFMMEU argued that the Full Bench’s decision was affected by jurisdictional error, as it failed to correct three jurisdictional errors by the Deputy President. The central issue before the court was whether the decision of the Full Bench of the Fair Work Commission was subject to jurisdictional error and whether the Deputy President had exercised discretion upon finding exceptional circumstances. Additionally, the court had to determine whether the Deputy President considered if the extended notice period would diminish the employees’ bargaining power and whether sufficient evidence was put before the Deputy President.
The court found that the Full Bench’s decision was not affected by jurisdictional error. It was observed that the Full Bench had correctly applied the principle that the reasons for the decision must be read fairly and as a whole. The court found that the Deputy President had considered the exceptional circumstances justifying the extension of the notice period and had weighed the interests of the employer and third parties against the diminution of the employees’ bargaining power. The court concluded that there was no jurisdictional error in the Full Bench’s decision and that the Deputy President had exercised his discretion properly.
ORDERS:
1. The application be dismissed.
2. In the event that either party wishes to make an application for costs, that party must file and serve written submissions (limited to 2 pages) within 7 days of the delivery of the Full Court’s reasons, and the other party must file and serve its written submissions (limited to 2 pages) in response within 7 days thereafter.
The court found that the Full Bench’s decision was not affected by jurisdictional error. It was observed that the Full Bench had correctly applied the principle that the reasons for the decision must be read fairly and as a whole. The court found that the Deputy President had considered the exceptional circumstances justifying the extension of the notice period and had weighed the interests of the employer and third parties against the diminution of the employees’ bargaining power. The court concluded that there was no jurisdictional error in the Full Bench’s decision and that the Deputy President had exercised his discretion properly.
ORDERS:
1. The application be dismissed.
2. In the event that either party wishes to make an application for costs, that party must file and serve written submissions (limited to 2 pages) within 7 days of the delivery of the Full Court’s reasons, and the other party must file and serve its written submissions (limited to 2 pages) in response within 7 days thereafter.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Employment & Labour Law
Legal Concepts
-
Protected Industrial Action
-
Exceptional Circumstances
-
Jurisdictional Error
-
Industrial Law
-
Statutory Interpretation
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Citations
Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union v DP World Sydney Ltd [2019] FCAFC 99
Cases Citing This Decision
238
Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union v DP World Sydney Ltd (No 2)
[2019] FCAFC 114
Mr Kuncho Kurtev v KCB Australia Pty Ltd, Toni Telfer
[2025] FWCFB 13
Cases Cited
14
Statutory Material Cited
2
Fox v Percy
[2003] HCA 22
R v Toohey; ex parte Northern Land Council
[1981] HCA 74