FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA
| GREGOR v CFMEU & ANOR | [2009] FMCA 1266 |
| INDUSTRIAL LAW – Penalty hearing – unlawful building industrial action – admitted contraventions – considerations on penalty – agreed penalty. |
| Building and Construction Industry Improvement Act 2005 (Cth) |
| Minister for Industry, Tourism & Resources v Mobil Oil [2004] FCA FC 72 Stuart-Mahoney v Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union [2008] FCA 1426 Leighton Contractors v Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union (2006) 164 IR 375 Temple v Powell (2008) 169 FCR 169 Stuart v L.U. Simon Builders Pty Ltd [2008] FCA 107 Wells v Locarno Management Pty Ltd [2008] FCA 1034 Ponzio v B & P Caelli Constructions Pty Ltd (2007) 158 FCR 543 Construction Forestry Mining & Energy Union v Coal & Allied Operations Pty Ltd (No.2) (1999) 94 IR 231 Australian Ophthalmic Supplies Pty Limited v McAlary-Smith (2008) 165 FCR 560 |
| Applicant: | MURRAY GREGOR |
| First Respondent: | CONSTRUCTION FORESTRY, MINING AND ENERGY UNION |
| Second Respondent: | DANIEL BERARDI |
| File Number: | MLG 582 of 2009 |
| Judgment of: | O'Sullivan FM |
| Hearing date: | 16 December 2009 |
| Date of Last Submission: | 16 December 2009 |
| Delivered at: | Melbourne |
| Delivered on: | 16 December 2009 |
REPRESENTATION
| Counsel for the Applicant: | Mr M. Biviano |
| Solicitors for the Applicant: | Office of the Australian Building and Construction Commissioner |
| Counsel for the First and Second Respondents: | Ms E. Walters |
| Solicitors for the First and Second Respondents: | Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union |
ORDERS
The first respondent pay to the Consolidated Revenue Fund by way of penalty for a contravention on 19 July 2007 of s.38 Building and Construction Industry Improvement Act 2005 (Cth) the sum of $7,500 within 30 days.
The second respondent pay to the Consolidated Revenue Fund by way of penalty for a contravention on 19 July 2007 of s.38 Building and Construction Industry Improvement Act 2005 (Cth) the sum of $1,000 within 30 days of the second respondent being adjudged to have breached any provision of the Building and Construction Industry Improvement Act 2005 (Cth), provided that the contravention of such legislation was committed within 2 years of the date of this order.
The proceedings otherwise dismissed.
There be no orders as to costs.
| FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT MELBOURNE |
MLG 582 of 2009
| MURRAY GREGOR |
Applicant
And
| CONSTRUCTION FORESTRY, MINING AND ENERGY UNION |
First Respondent
And
| DANIEL BERARDI |
Second Respondent
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
(Ex tempore)
Murray Gregor (“the applicant”) is an inspector appointed pursuant to s.57 of the Building and Construction Industry Improvement Act
2005 (“the BCII Act”). On 20 May 2009 the applicant commenced proceedings against the Construction Forestry, Mining and Energy Union (“the first respondent”) and Daniel Berardi (“the second respondent”).The applicant alleged conduct in breach of the BCII Act by the respondents at a building site in Victoria in July 2007.
The application
The application as filed on 20 May 2009 sought the following orders:
“1.A declaration that the First and Second Respondents contravened s.38 of the Building and Construction Industry Improvement Act 2005 (Cth) by engaging…
Continue reading Gregor v CFMEU
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- Gregor v CFMEU [2009] FMCA 1266
- Case
- [2009] FMCA 1266
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The primary legal issue before the court was whether the CFMEU and its members had indeed contravened section 38 of the Act, which pertains to specified unlawful activities in the building and construction industry. The court had to determine whether the actions of the CFMEU and its members warranted the imposition of financial penalties under the legislation.
In its decision, the court found that there were indeed contraventions of the Act by the CFMEU and its members on the specified date. Consequently, the court ordered the first respondent, the CFMEU, to pay a penalty of $7,500, and the second respondent to pay a penalty of $1,000, contingent on any further breaches of the Act within two years of the order. The court dismissed the proceedings in all other respects and made no orders regarding costs.
The court's order was specific and directed the first respondent to pay the penalty within 30 days from the date of the judgment, while the second respondent's penalty was to be paid under the condition of any further breaches occurring within the stipulated timeframe. This ruling underscores the court's role in enforcing compliance with industry regulations and ensuring that penalties are imposed for non-compliance.
Orders
Orders of the court
1.
The first respondent pay to the Consolidated Revenue Fund by way of penalty for a contravention on 19 July 2007 of s.38 Building and Construction Industry Improvement Act 2005 (Cth) the sum of $7,500 within 30 days.
2.
The second respondent pay to the Consolidated Revenue Fund by way of penalty for a contravention on 19 July 2007 of s.38 Building and Construction Industry Improvement Act 2005 (Cth) the sum of $1,000 within 30 days of the second respondent being adjudged to have breached any provision of the Building and Construction Industry Improvement Act 2005 (Cth), provided that the contravention of such legislation was committed within 2 years of the date of this order.
3.
The proceedings otherwise dismissed.
4.
There be no orders as to costs.
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.