Cuevas, Luis v Walker, John trading as Walker Panel Repairs

[1982] FCA 41

IN T11r :mTTER of t h e C o n c l l l a t i o n

-

and A r b l ~ r a t l o n A c t 19G4

BCTII'EEM :	LUIS CUEVAS
__--  Informant

AND :  JOBI.: WALKEd ( t r a d i n g as Walker

Panc l Repairs) Dcfendsnt

REASOKS FOR JUDGMENT

24 February 1 9 8 2 KEELY J.

HIS HONOUR:  I do n o t n e e d t o h c a r y o u , Xr i h y e s . I t h l n k

cbsc has ranqed

a l l e g z i l o n s of ~ n t l - u n ~ o n conduct on the o x hand

a n d a l l e g a t l o c s of s t e a l i n g , a c o n g s t o t h e r t h l n g 5 , on

t h e o t h e r .

I t h l n k t h a t l n t h o s e c l r c u r n s t z n c e s t h e c o u r t

should be c c r c f u l t o c o n f l n e l t s c l f to only r>ullnG

on tha t t i h l ch It h a s t o r u l e o n , t o only maklng

f ind lngs whlch are d l r c c t l y r c l e v h n t t o t h e p r o c e e d l n g

b e f o r e	It.
I reject Mr L s u r l t z C a v d r o n - \ h l t e ' S evldcnce

as b e l n g u n t r u e l n a number of natters. It 1s n o t

n e c e s s a r y t o d e a l v l t h all of h l s c v i d e r c c b u t I

reject, f o r examplz, h l s e v l d e n c c t h a t t h e $5 n o t e

was n o t I n h l s w a l l e t . Xrs Hartog, who 1:as c a l l e d

by Mr Hayes f o r t h e d c f e z c e , *,vas a very lrnpresslve

w i t n e s s . I accept a l l o f h e r e v l d c z c e a s b c l n g t r u e

cm mh le

luwak 24.2.02

.

. . ~

I have revle:icd ihc evlr 'cmce on Chat I n thc

last h z l f h o u r . I L C J C C ~ t h e ev lccnce of [lr I a u r 1 t z

C a w i ~ o n - : ; h ~ i e t h a t h l s d u t l c s were chr;r.g,cd fIoW

s p e n c h n g .5pprox11nately 2 5 pc'r C C ~ L of 1!1<. vork tunc

on c l e d n l n r r and washlng c a r s and clezc>Lng tkc :;orksl,o?

t o spencilng ap2roxl. latcly	75	per	c e n t	o€ 111s	time on
t h a t work.

I pe rhaps shou ld ad6 t ha t Mr L a u r l t z C z : c k c ~ n -

Whlte Gid not compl.all; a t any s taGe, on t he evLZence, ,

t h a t 111s d u t l c s h a d been chanqecl, e l c h e r d r a ~ z t ~ c a l i y

or g r a d u a l l y , f r o m t h e p r o > o r t l o n of 25 per cent on

c l ean lng t ype o f xork t o 75 p e r c:nt of I l l s time on

c l e a n l n g t y p c of work, and I n p z s s l n g 1 mentlor; Chat

M r Reld, lr. e f f e c t , said - and I do Lot hzve Cra i sc r lp t

o f h l s e v l d e c c e - t h a t he would expect acy apprc.?t lce

who had bcen changai In the wzy In xh lch lt 15

suggcs t ed occu r rc2 hc re	t o	have complzLnc6 about	the
change.

I n o t h e r words, h e would have complained of

be ing g lven t oo much c l e z n l n q vork. M r Rcld lrri>resscc!

me a s be lnq bo th a t r u t h f u l xitr.ess acd an accu-z te

wi tnes s , and I h a v e n o h e s l t a t l o n 111 accepi lnc j h l s

cvidcnce. blore s p e c l f l c a l l y , I acccpt; 112s ev1dcr.c;-

a n d t h a t of Mr Walker c h a t t h e r e was no such change

of d u t l e s as 1s a l l c g e d b y t h e l n f o r n a n t .

The second matter upon whlch Mr llccgan re l ies

was t h a t t h e l e t t e r from Xr t la lker of 16 June 1981,

whlch 1s e x h l b l t E I n t h e s e p r o c e e d l n g s , w a s a l d

by M r Meegan t o cons t l tu te an l r i iucement t o

Mr Lauritz Cavdron-Whlte t o reslc;n h1s employment or

a p p r e n t l c c s h l p w l t h t h e d e f e n d a n t , a n d h e s u b n l t t c d

t h a t t h z t	letCer	c o n s t l t u t e d a n l n j u r y	I n	h l s
employment.

I do n o t t h m k I need t o s a y ar,y more, b u t I

t o a c c e p t t h a t s u b l u s s l o n . I t 1 s a

am q u i t c unable

l i t t l c d l f f l c u l t t o a d v a n c e a n y more reasons than

t h a t b e c a u s e I d o n o t r e a l l y c o n s l 6 e r t h a t a n y

s u b s t a n t l a l r e a s o n s ccrc urged I n support of I t , b u t

my vlew 15, as I th snk I l n d l c a t e d I n t h e c o u r s e o f

a rgument , thd t t o w r l t t , t h a t s o r t of l e t t c r t o a

l a d ' s f a t h e r Goes n o t secm t o mc t o come w l t h l n t h e

conduc t fo rb ldcen by t he s ec t lon .

The l e t t e r was, a s I th lnk has been msdc c l c a r .

exp res s lng a poln t o f v lew; It s p e a k s f o r ~ t s c l f .

b u t It was cxpres s lnq a p o l n t of vlew t h a t h e was n o t

s u i t e d t o t h e a p p r e n t l c c s h l p a n d c h a t h e o u g h t t o

c o n s l d c r	soire	o thcr	form of cmploymcnt. I canco t
b e l l e v e	t h a t s e c t l o n	5	1 c t G c d c C t o p r e v e n t a n

employer from wrlclng such a le t tcr .

luwak 2 4 . 2 . 8 2 223

cm mh 2c

However, l n my view such a t h r e a t , I f I t

occur red , chd n o t c o n s t l t u t e l n j u r l n , ; i I r L a u r l t z

Cawdron-I:hlte I n hls employment, nor d l d t h e F:lleged

t h r e a t by Nr Donmnl. Agaln, I t h l n k t h e r e a c . 0 1 1 ~ f o r

t h a t v iew prokably suf f lc lcc t ly appear f rom xhdt I

have sa ld dur lng counse l ' : ; aadrcss . I r c l t e r a t c \,.hat

I s a l d l n r e l a t l o n t o t h e p r e v l o c s m3ttcr: J car.not

believe t h e s e c t l c n I n t e n d s by the words " ln ju r lng

i n h i s errployment" t o b r i n g w l t h l n i t s compass t h a t

t y p e of conduct.

It a p p e a r s t o m c t o be unrelatec? t o t h e

employment, except I n t h e s c n s e t h a t It hzppencd t o

occur - i f It occurred - d u r l n g work hour s , ar.d t h a t

does not seem t o m c t o b e s u f f l e l e n t . The f o u r t h 2nd

las t m a t t e r t h a t was advanced was what has been

b r o a d l y c z l l c d t h e a c c u s a t i o n o f s t c a l l n g t h e	$5	n o t c
from	t h e tow	t r u c k .

I have a l ready expressed v icws on the f ac t s

i n r e l a t l o n t o t h a t matter. I h a v e r e j c c t c d

Mr Lauri tz Cawdron->!hl te 's evldence I n t h e \:ay I n

which I h a v e a l r e a d y l n d l c a t r 2 , b u t I should pcrhzps

a d d t h a t c o n s l s t c n t . l y w l t h t h c v1ew.s t h a t I have

expressed a s t o w h a t c o n s t l t u t e s I n J u r l c g a mar? I n

his employment, I a ~ n q u i t c u n a b l e t o a c c e p t t h e

submisslon t h a t maklng such an accusa t lon amounts to

i n j u r l n g a man I n h l s employEent.

It would be d l f f e r c n t , as I t h l n k I l n d l c a t e d

i n the	course	of	argument ,	o r a t	least	It mlght	be
d i f f e r e n t ,	p e r h a p s	l	should s a y ,	I f	I	had been

s a t i s f l c d o n t h e c v l d e n c e t h a t l t was a completely

fa lse charge Srougl l t aga lns t a p e r s o n , b u t on t h e

e v i d e n c e a n d t h e f l n d l n g t h a t , o f c o u r s e , 1s n o t t h e

posi t l o n .

luwak

3e

l 1 .

. . e

L Thcre w r e somc a s p e c t s of r l r Walker ' S

e v i d e n c e	w h ~ c h	I w - e	no t	ronv lnc lng ,	l nc lud lng
some	of	h i s statcment:s	as	to	h l s a t t l t u c l e t o
unions.	M	Ftelcl and Mr; IJartoq	r	nave	some

evldence hhlch r .up.ports Mr Walker t o :,one

degree on t h a t qucs t : l on , a l t hough t hey necessa r l ly

cannot- suppor t h lm to any grezt e s t cn t because

t h e y were n o t p r e s e n t a t t h e c o n v e r s a t l o c s w h l c h

took p lace be tween i4r Walker and b i r Caxdron-1:hlte

on onc occaslon on t h e Sa turday m o r r ~ ~ i ~ g and c t t h e

l n c e t l n g a r l s l n g o u t of and following t h e l e t t c r

of 16 June 1981 betwecn M r Cawdron-Wh~te senlor ,

M r L a u r l t z Cawdron-!ihlte and Mr Walker.

A

There w a s s imply a conf l . l c t of ev ldence

on t h a t q u c s t l o n a s t o whether M r Iqalkcr d l d

express t h e view rshlch are a l l e g e d a n a i n s t

him. On t h a t c o n f l l c t l n g c v l d e n c e , I am n o t

able t o makc any f l nd lng as t o whether :.Ir Kalkcr

d l d or d l d n o t express t h e vxews suggesting,

i f	I	cou ld pu t	It	b r o a d l y , t h a t h e d l d n o t	writ
u n i o n i s t s	l n	h l s	s h o p .	However,	n o t v l t h s t a n d l n g

my f a i l u r e t o make a f l n d x g on t h a t issue, on

f M r Walker ' s ev ldence as a whole whlch, on some

aspects 'sas supported by t h e ev idence of

Mrs Hartog 6nd Kr g e l d , t h e d e f e r d a n t h a s s u c c e e d e d

i n persuacllng me on t h e a p p r o p r l a t e o n u s - namely,

on t h e b a l a n c e of p r o b a b l l l t l e s - t h a t none of h l s

actions I n respect of M r L a u r l t z Cawdron-V!hlte,

t h e SUbJeCt of t h e l n f o r m a t l o n , were a c t u a t e d

by t he r eason a l l eged , name ly , t ha t t he conduc t

was :

By reason of t h e c l r c u m s t a n c e s t h a t t h e

employee

(i) Proposcd t o become a member o f t h e

o rgan lza t ion . name ly , t he Veh lc l e

Bui lders Employees Federat lon of

A u s t r a l i a , a n d

(ii) Was a member of a n o r g a n l z a t l o n , namely,

the Vehicle Bul lders Employees Pederat lon

of Aus t ra l la .

Perhaps I should add Jus t one las t t h l n g : I

- accept Mr W a l k c r ' s e v l d e n c e t h a t h e d l d n o t know t h a t

Mr Laurltz Cawdron-Khlte was a nemher un t l l Thur sday ,

17 September . a l though. on h l s ev ldence , shor t ly

b e f o r e t h a t d a t e h e h a d some reason t o s u s p e c t t h a t

Mr Cawdron-Whlte m q h t be a member. A s I have s a l d ,

I have accep ted h l s ev lC ience on t ha t po ln t t ha t he

d i d n o t know u n t i l t h a t d a t e , a l t h o u g h he had some

g rounds ve ry sho r t ly be fo re - namcly. t h e c o n v e r s a t l o n

w l t h Mr Dol?nlcl and t h e o t l ~ c r Employee, and a l s o

t h e l e t t e r from i4r Cawdron-l:hltc Senior dated

luwak 2 4 . 2 . 8 2

c cb l e

, P

. . 7

MR HAYCS: Hsvlng r e g a r d t o some of t h e z u t h o r l t l e s , I t

might be a n unusual d p p l l c a t l o n , b u t 1 do make

a n a p p l l c a t l c n f o r c o s t s .

REPORTED NOT TRANSCRIBED

HIS HONOUR:  I re ject t h e a p p l l c a t l o n f o r c o s t s . T h e r e

will be a n order a s t o t h e r e t u r n of the c x h l b l t s .

i

AT 4.35 9 4 TEE IGTTER WAS ADJOUXNZD

INDEFIKITELY

_.

luwak

c c b 2 e

FEDERAL LAW COURTS

I111111111l1 IIIII 11l11 IIIII I l11 1111 1111 l

*820042*

944 of 10056 DATACOM INFORMATION SYSTEMS