Construction Forestry Mining and Energy Union v Alfred

Link copied
Case Copied 22 min read

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Construction Forestry Mining and Energy Union v Alfred [2016] FCA 591

File number: QUD 220 of 2016
Judge: LOGAN J
Date of judgment: 6 May 2016
Catchwords: INDUSTRIAL LAW – power of Fair Work Building Inspector to obtain information and documents – notice to produce issued pursuant to s 712 – whether notice to produce was invalid and of no effect – whether notice to produce referred to building matter – notice to produce wholly deficient in detail – notice invalid and of no effect – Fair Work (Building Industry) Act 2012 (Cth) ss 4, 5, 59, 59C – Fair Work Act (Cth) ss 706, 712
Legislation:

Fair Work Act 2009 ss 346, 349, 703, 706(1), 706(1)(a), 709, 712, 713

Fair Work (Building Industry) Act 2012 (Cth) ss 4, 5, 59(1), 59C, 59C(1), 59C(2)(a), 59C(3)

Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth) s 39B

Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth) ss 155, 155(1)

Workplace Relations Act1996 (Cth) s 86(1A)(c)

Cases cited:

Bannerman v Mildura Fruit Juices Pty Ltd (1984) 2 FCR 581

Melbourne Home of Ford Pty Ltd v Trade Practices Commission and Bannerman (No 2) (1979) 40 FLR 428

Thorson v Pine [2004] FCA 805

Thorson v Pine [2004] FCA 1316

Date of hearing: 6 May 2016
Registry: Queensland
Division: General Division
National Practice Area: Employment & Industrial Relations
Category: Catchwords
Number of paragraphs: 26
Counsel for the Applicant: Mr C A Massy
Solicitor for the Applicant: Hall Payne Lawyers
Counsel for the Respondent: Mr C Murdoch
Solicitor for the Respondent: Clayton Utz Lawyers

ORDERS

QUD 220 of 2016
BETWEEN:

CONSTRUCTION FORESTRY MINING AND ENERGY UNION

Applicant

AND:

GREGORY ALFRED

Respondent

JUDGE:

LOGAN J

DATE OF ORDER:

6 MAY 2016

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1.The Notice to Produce Records or Documents purportedly issued pursuant to s 712 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) to the applicant on 11 March 2016 is invalid and of no effect.

Note:    Entry of orders is dealt with in Rule 39.32 of the Federal Court Rules 2011.


REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
(REVISED FROM TRANSCRIPT)

LOGAN J:

  1. On 11 March 2016, Mr Gregory Alfred, a Fair Work Building Industry Inspector, appointed under the Fair Work (Building Industry) Act 2012 (Cth) (FWBI Act) signed a notice addressed to the proper officer of the Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union (CFMEU) requiring it to produce, pursuant to s 712 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) (FWA), documents set out in that notice. That notice was subsequently served on the CFMEU. The notice required compliance by production by 4.00pm on Friday, 1 April 2016. By agreement between the CFMEU and Mr Alfred, the time for compliance has been extended pending the hearing and determination of a challenge which the CFMEU has made to the validity of the notice. That challenge takes the form of an application under s 39B of the Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth) for a declaration that the notice is void and of no effect.

  2. Within the FWBI Act, s 59(1) provides:

    (1)The…

CaseChat AU logo

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Construction Forestry Mining and Energy Union v Alfred and more:

  • Read every judgment in full
  • Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
  • See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
  • Download judgments as PDF or Word
Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details
Case
[2016] FCA 591
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Construction Forestry Mining and Energy Union, acting on behalf of its members, brought an application in the Federal Circuit Court of Australia against Alfred. The matter centred around a Notice to Produce issued by a Fair Work Building Inspector under section 712 of the Fair Work Act 2009. The Union challenged the validity of this notice, claiming it was invalid and of no effect. The court was required to determine whether the notice to produce was validly issued under the Act and whether it adequately referred to the building matter and provided sufficient detail. The Union argued that the notice was deficient in detail and therefore invalid, while Alfred contended that the notice was valid and enforceable.

The court examined the statutory provisions and relevant case law to assess the validity of the notice. It found that the notice to produce was indeed invalid and of no effect. The court held that the notice did not sufficiently refer to the building matter and lacked the necessary detail required by the Act. Consequently, the court ruled in favour of the Union, declaring the notice to produce invalid and of no effect. This decision highlights the importance of compliance with statutory requirements when issuing notices to produce records or documents in the building industry context.

The court's decision underscores the necessity for Fair Work Building Inspectors to adhere strictly to the legislative framework when issuing notices to produce. The Union's challenge to the validity of the notice was successful, resulting in the notice being deemed invalid and of no effect. This ruling serves as a reminder to all parties involved in building industry disputes to ensure that any notices issued comply with the statutory requirements set out in the Fair Work (Building Industry) Act 2012 and the Fair Work Act 2009.

Orders

Orders of the court

1. The Notice to Produce Records or Documents purportedly issued pursuant to s 712 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) to the applicant on 11 March 2016 is invalid and of no effect.

Note: Entry of orders is dealt with in Rule 39.32 of the Federal Court Rules 2011.

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.