Director of the Fair Work Building Industry Inspectorate v Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union (The Footscray Station Case)
Case
•
[2016] FCA 872
•5 August 2016
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Director of the Fair Work Building Industry Inspectorate v Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union (The Footscray Station Case) [2016] FCA 872
[2016] FCA 872
5 August 2016
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The Director of the Fair Work Building Industry Inspectorate brought proceedings against the Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union (CFMEU), alleging contraventions of sections 499 and 500 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) by its two officials, Mr Myles and Mr MacDonald. The alleged contraventions arose from the officials' conduct at a construction site for the Regional Rail Link Project Package C, an infrastructure project in Victoria, on 27 February 2014. The Director claimed that the CFMEU was liable for the contraventions under section 793 of the Act. The Court needed to decide whether the officials failed to comply with a request to comply with an occupational health and safety requirement, and whether the failure constituted improper conduct for the purposes of section 500.
The Court considered the evidence presented by the Director, including visual and audio recordings of the events in question, and found that the officials had indeed contravened sections 499 and 500 of the Act. The Court held that the request made by the site manager/superintendent employed by Thiess was reasonable, and that it pertained to an occupational health and safety requirement that applied to the premises. Furthermore, the Court determined that the officials' failure to comply with the request constituted improper conduct as they intentionally hindered or obstructed a person. The Court also noted the absence of any evidence to support the respondents' claims of privilege against exposure to civil penalties. Consequently, the Court found the CFMEU liable for the contraventions committed by its officials.
The Court considered the evidence presented by the Director, including visual and audio recordings of the events in question, and found that the officials had indeed contravened sections 499 and 500 of the Act. The Court held that the request made by the site manager/superintendent employed by Thiess was reasonable, and that it pertained to an occupational health and safety requirement that applied to the premises. Furthermore, the Court determined that the officials' failure to comply with the request constituted improper conduct as they intentionally hindered or obstructed a person. The Court also noted the absence of any evidence to support the respondents' claims of privilege against exposure to civil penalties. Consequently, the Court found the CFMEU liable for the contraventions committed by its officials.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Industrial Law
Legal Concepts
-
Occupational Health and Safety
-
Contract Formation
-
Unconscionable Conduct
-
Unjust Enrichment
-
Res Judicata
-
Interlocutory Orders
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Most Recent Citation
Australian Building and Construction Commissioner v Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union (Kiama Aged Care Centre Case) [2021] FCA 920
Cases Citing This Decision
12
Cases Cited
9
Statutory Material Cited
7
Gore v Australian Securities and Investments Commission
[2017] FCAFC 13