Dalley & Ors v Kelsey & Ors

In the case of Dalley & Ors v Kelsey & Ors, the appellants, who are elected Councillors of Logan City Council, appeal against the decision of the Industrial Commission to grant an interlocutory injunction to the first respondent, Ms Kelsey, who was employed as the Chief Executive Officer of Logan City Council. The injunction was intended to reinstate Ms Kelsey to her position after the Council voted to terminate her employment. The primary issues in this appeal revolve around whether the Industrial Commissioner correctly applied the test for granting an interlocutory injunction, whether Ms Kelsey established a prima facie case, and whether the balance of convenience favours the making of an interlocutory order. The court also considered whether the Industrial Commissioner engaged in speculation about the state of the evidence at the final hearing and whether the effect of the reverse onus in section 306 of the Industrial Relations Act 2016 (Qld) is relevant in an interlocutory application.

The Court of Appeal found that the Industrial Commissioner applied the correct test for granting an interlocutory injunction, which requires a serious question to be tried and a prima facie case to be established. However, the Court held that Ms Kelsey did not establish a prima facie case because the evidence presented was weak, and there was no direct contradiction or inherent implausibility. The Court also found that the Industrial Commissioner engaged in speculation about the evidence that might emerge at the final hearing, which is not appropriate in an interlocutory application. Furthermore, the Court held that the balance of convenience did not favour the making of an interlocutory order for reinstatement because of the assumed weakness of Ms Kelsey's case. Consequently, the appeal was allowed, and the application for interlocutory relief was dismissed.

The final orders of the court were that the appeals were allowed, and the application for interlocutory relief was dismissed. The decision highlights the importance of establishing a prima facie case and the correct application of the test for granting an interlocutory injunction, as well as the need to avoid speculation about the evidence that might emerge at the final hearing.