CPSU v Telstra Corporation Limited

Link copied
Case Copied 16 min read

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

CPSU, The Community and Public Sector Union v Telstra
Corporation Limited
[2001] FCA 1364

INDUSTRIAL LAW –contraventions of s 298K of the Workplace Relations Act 1996 (Cth) – penalty to be imposed – factors to be taken into account – whether penalty should be paid to union

Workplace Relations Act 1996 (Cth) ss 298K(1), 298U, 347, 356

Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v ABB Transmission and Distribution Limited [2001] FCA 383 - applied
Automotive, Food, Engineering, Printing and Kindred Industries Union v DMG Industries Pty Ltd (2000) 102 IR 175 – followed
CPSU, The Community and Public Sector Union v Telstra Corporation Limited (2000) 99 IR 238 – referred to
CPSU, The Community and Public Sector Union v Telstra Corporation Limited [2001] FCA 813 – referred to
Gibbs v The Major, Councillors and Citizens of the City of Altona (1992) 37 FCR 216 – referred to
Maritime Union of Australia v Geraldton Port Authority (No 2) (2000) 94 IR 404 - followed
Municipal Officers Association of Australia v City of Bayswater (1987) 22 IR 45 - applied
R v Thompson (1975) 11 SASR 217 - applied
Seymour v Stawell Timber Industries Pty Ltd (1985) 13 IR 289 - applied
Telstra Corporation Limited v The Community and Public Sector Union (2001) 107 FCR 93 – referred to

CPSU, THE COMMUNITY AND PUBLIC SECTOR UNION, ASSOCIATION OF PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERS, SCIENTISTS AND MANAGERS, AUSTRALIA, COMMUNICATIONS, ELECTRICAL, ELECTRONIC, ENERGY, INFORMATION, POSTAL, PLUMBING AND ALLIED SERVICES UNION OF AUSTRALIA and PROFESSIONAL OFFICERS’ ASSOCIATION (VICTORIA) v TELSTRA CORPORATION LIMITED

V 194 of 2000

JUDGE:        FINKELSTEIN J
PLACE:        MELBOURNE
DATE:          26 SEPTEMBER 2001

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

VICTORIA DISTRICT REGISTRY

V 194 of 2000

BETWEEN:

CPSU, THE COMMUNITY AND PUBLIC SECTOR UNION, ASSOCIATION OF PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERS, SCIENTISTS AND MANAGERS, AUSTRALIA, COMMUNICATIONS, ELECTRICAL, ELECTRONIC, ENERGY, INFORMATION, POSTAL, PLUMBING AND ALLIED SERVICES UNION OF AUSTRALIA and PROFESSIONAL OFFICERS’ ASSOCIATION (VICTORIA)
Applicants

AND:

TELSTRA CORPORATION LIMITED
Respondent

JUDGE:

FINKELSTEIN J

DATE:

26 SEPTEMBER 2001

PLACE:

MELBOURNE

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

The Respondent pay a penalty of $1.70 for each of the 43,828 contraventions of s 298K of the Workplace Relations Act 1996 (Cth).

Note:  Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

VICTORIA DISTRICT REGISTRY

V 194 of 2000

BETWEEN:

CPSU, THE COMMUNITY AND PUBLIC SECTOR UNION, ASSOCIATION OF PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERS, SCIENTISTS AND MANAGERS, AUSTRALIA, COMMUNICATIONS, ELECTRICAL, ELECTRONIC, ENERGY, INFORMATION, POSTAL, PLUMBING AND ALLIED SERVICES UNION OF AUSTRALIA and PROFESSIONAL OFFICERS’ ASSOCIATION (VICTORIA)
Applicants

AND:

TELSTRA CORPORATION LIMITED
Respondent

JUDGE:

FINKELSTEIN J

DATE:

26 SEPTEMBER 2001

PLACE:

MELBOURNE

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

  1. On 29 June 2001 I delivered my reasons for holding that the respondent, Telstra Corporation Limited, had contravened s 298K(1) of the Workplace Relations Act 1996 (Cth). The contravention results from an email sent by the managing director of Telstra’s Employee Relations Group to the managers and team leaders of the group. Earlier I found that the email would…

CaseChat AU logo

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read CPSU v Telstra Corporation Limited 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
[2001] FCA 1364
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of CPSU v Telstra Corporation Limited was heard by the Federal Court of Australia. The Communication, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia (CPSU) brought an action against Telstra Corporation Limited for contraventions of section 298K of the Workplace Relations Act 1996 (Cth). The dispute centred on Telstra's alleged failure to provide the union with certain information as required by the legislation. The court was tasked with determining the liability of Telstra for these alleged contraventions and, if liable, the appropriate penalty.

The central legal issue for the court to decide was whether Telstra had contravened section 298K by failing to provide the CPSU with information as mandated by the legislation. The court had to interpret the statutory provisions to ascertain the nature and scope of the obligations imposed on Telstra and whether these obligations were indeed breached. Additionally, the court needed to decide on the appropriate penalty for each contravention, if any, given the statutory framework and the facts of the case.

In its decision, the Federal Court held that Telstra was indeed liable for the contraventions of section 298K. The court meticulously examined the statutory requirements and the evidence presented, concluding that Telstra had not fulfilled its obligations under the law. The court then determined the appropriate penalty for each contravention, taking into account the legislative framework and the circumstances of the case. As a result, Telstra was ordered to pay a penalty of $1.70 for each of the 43,828 contraventions identified.

The court's final orders required Telstra to pay a penalty of $1.70 for each of the 43,828 contraventions of section 298K. This sum totalled to a significant financial penalty, reflecting the seriousness of the contraventions found against Telstra. The decision underscores the importance of compliance with workplace legislation and the consequences of failing to meet statutory obligations.

Orders

Orders of the court

The Respondent pay a penalty of $1.70 for each of the 43,828 contraventions of s 298K of the Workplace Relations Act 1996 (Cth).

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.