Construction, Forestry, Mining & Energy Union & Anor v Cahill

The High Court of Australia considered a dispute between the Construction, Forestry, Mining & Energy Union (CFMEU) and its organiser, Mr. Michael Cranney, on the one hand, and Mr. John Cahill, a director of a construction company, on the other. The dispute arose from allegations that Mr. Cranney, acting as an organiser for the CFMEU, had engaged in conduct that contravened section 174(2) of the *Workplace Relations Act 1996* (Cth) by entering a construction site without the express or implied consent of the occupier. Mr. Cahill, as a director of the company occupying the site, had sought to prevent Mr. Cranney's entry.

The central legal issue before the High Court was whether Mr. Cranney's entry onto the construction site, for the purpose of exercising rights conferred by the *Workplace Relations Act 1996* (Cth), constituted a contravention of section 174(2) of that Act, which prohibited entry without the occupier's consent. This required the Court to interpret the scope of the rights of union officials to enter workplaces and the limitations imposed by the Act on such entry, particularly in relation to the occupier's consent.

The High Court held that the right of entry provisions in the *Workplace Relations Act 1996* (Cth) were intended to confer a statutory right on authorised industrial officers to enter workplaces for specific purposes, and that this statutory right necessarily implied a consent to enter for those purposes. Therefore, the requirement for the occupier's "express or implied consent" under section 174(2) was satisfied by the statutory grant of entry rights. The Court reasoned that to require separate consent from the occupier, in addition to the statutory right, would render the right of entry nugatory.

The appeal was allowed, and the orders of the Full Federal Court were set aside.