Grimshaw, Geoffrey Allan v Petrie, Jack

[1982] FCA 291

1.

REVTSED FROM TRANSCRIPT

IF THE FEDERAL	COURT	OF	AUSTRALTA	)
1

VJCTORIA	DISTRTCT	REGTSTRY	) No. V.	45 of 1 9 R ?
)

INDUSTRIAL EIVTSION \

DETVIEEN : GEOFFRFY ALLAN GRTMSHAW

A p p l i c a n t

AND :	JACK PETRIE, JVAN IIODGS@W
a n d TRANSPORT WORKERS '
IJNTON OF A U S T R R L I A

R e s p o n d e n t

1 7 DECEMRER, 1382 KEELY J

REASONS FOR JUDGMEMT

F i r s t l y I o v e r r u l e t h e p r e l i m i n a r y objection t a k e n

by the r e s p o n d e n t s t h a t Hr. Grimshaw was n o t a member of t he

T r a n s p o r t Workers' Union of A u s t r a l i a . As i n d i c a t e d t o Mr.

K e n n a n d u r i n g t he h e a r i n g . I d o t h a t s u b s t a n t i a l l y f o r t h e

reasons given by th i s C o u r t i n t h e r l e c j s i o n of T r o j a v

A u s t r a l a s i a n M e a t I n d u s t r y E m p l o y e e s ' U n i o n ( V i c t o r i a n

B r a n c h ) (1978) 23 A.L.R. 19 a n d in p a r t i c u l a r a t pages 2 4 t o

26 of the report.

L

I n my v i e w t h e o p l n i o n a s 'CO t h e l a w se t o u t there

q a i n s some s u p p o r t from a d e c i s i o n which was n o t referred to

i n Trcjja's case r4~icl.1 i s the d e c i s i o n of t h e High C o u r t I n

S o n s o l j d a t e d P re s s L i m j - t e d v The A u s t r a l i a n J o u r n a l l s t s

-- -

2.

A s s o c l a t l o n (1q471 7 3 C . L . R . S49 a n d i n p a r t i c u l a r I h a v e i n

m i n d p a s s a g e s a t pages S61 t o S 6 2 i n t h e j o i n t j u d g m e n t o f

R i c h a n d W i l l i a n l s JJ.. Those p a s s a g e s were d i s c u s s e d i n

d e b a t e h e r e ea r l i e r t o d a y . A l t h o u g h they a p p e a r i n w h a t w a s

a d i s s e n t i n g ~ u d g m e n t , t h e i r H o n o u r s were d i s s e n t i n g o n a

q u e s t i o n of w h e t h e r a n appeal l a y a n d not. on t h a t p a r t i c u l a r

p o l n t . I t i s t r u e of c o u r s e , it i s o n l y obrter d i c t u m b u t It

is an obi te r d i c t u m of two members of the Hiqh Cour t .

The second mat ter i s t h a t I a m not. p r e p a r e d t o

a c c e d e t o t h e e a r n e s t a n d v i g o r o u s s u b m i s s i o n s u r q e d . u p o n m e

t h j s a f t e r n o o n by Mr. L e n c z n e r that I shou ld make orders i n

the terms of p a r a g r a p h s 1 , 2 and 3 of the r u l e t o show c a u s e

made b y S m i t h e r s J . o n 2 Decemher, 1982. Those o r d e r s t h a t

were s o u g h t i n c l u d e d a n order t h a t the r e s p o n d e n t , Mr.

P e t r i e , who v a s the r e t u r n i n g o f f icer , s h o u l d accept the

n o m i n a t i o n of M r . G r i m s h a w . Again T t h i n k t h a t matter has

b e e n s u f f i c i e n t l y d e a l t	with	i n d i s c u s s i o n	w i t h c o u n s e l here
t o d a y .

I p o i n t e d o u t t h a t the r u l e s i n t he i r p r e s e n t form

do n o t r e q u i r e t h a t s u c h a n o m i n a t i o n be a c c e p t e d a n d I a m

no t p e r s u a d e d t h a t a s a mat ter of law the r u l e s ( i . e . the

r u l e s i f a n d w h e n r e d r a f t e d ) m u s t i n c l u d e a r e q u i r e m e n t t h a t

a n o m i n a t i o n b y a p e r s o n i n M r . Gr imshaw ' s pos i t ion mus t be

a c c e p t e d by a r e t u r n i n g o f f i c e r . T h a t i s n e c e s s a r i l y

lmplicl t I n n o t a c c e p t l n g Vr. L e n c z n e r ' s s u b m i s s i o n based o n

. . .	. . ~	. --. ._	.--- -	. ^ _ _	L -	. - -	. .
3 .

t h c d i s t l n c t i o n between a n a b i l i t y t o nomlnate on the one

h a n d - a n d a n a b i l i t y t o I l o l r l o f f ic2 o n the o t h e r . T t seems t o

me t h a t It vlould h e d e s e r t i n s r e a l l t y i f the court were t o

order a r e t u r n i n g o f f i c e r t o a c c e p t a nomination f o r a n

o f f i c e , on t h e basis that t h e r u l e s d i d n o t p r e v e n t such a

nomin?tion, where i n f a c t t h e r u l e s i n their present form

made it c l e a r t h a t t h e p e r s o n c o u l d n o t hold t h e o f f i c e fcr

which he was wishing t o nominate.

The t h i r d m a t t e r i s t h a t T Accept he suSmissiona

put by both M r . Cooney and M r . Lenczner as to the meaninq of

rule 22(a ) o f t he T ranspor t Worke r s ' Un ion o f Aus t r a l i a

r u l e s . Although t h a t c o n s t r u c t i o n has a v e r y s u r p r i s i n g

r e s u l t , I a m unable to a c c e p t Mr. Kennan' S c o n s t r u c t i o n of

the sub r u l e . To do so wouLd lnvo lve hoth readinq words i n

t o the r u l e a n d a l s o o m i t t ~ n g v o r d s from it. I n a d d i t i o n , It

can hard ly he s a i d t h a t t h e draf t sman used the wronq vords

a c c i d e n t a l l y i n t h e f i r s t p a r t of r u l e 2 2 ( a ) b e c a u s e i n Che

p r o v i s o t o r u l e 2 2 ( a ) t h e 1.7ords. " a t the time of nomination

f o r e lect ion for a n o f f i c e " are used and yet those a r e t h e

words vhich Mr. Kennan u r g e s t h e C o u r t t o n o t i o n a l l y r e a d i n

t o r u l e 27.(a) i n p l a c e of t h e w o r d s , " a t a l l times o f h o l d i n g

t h e off i c e " . I a p p r e c i a t e t h a t i 4 r . Kennan put an

a l t e r n a t i v e submission t o t h a t hut. T t h i n k t h a t i s t h e

subs tance of it. J p o i n t o u t i n a d d i t i o n t h a t r u l e s 2 3 . ( b \ ,

( c ) , ( d ) , ( e ) and (7\, all e x p r e s s l y u s e e i t h e r t h e w o r d s ,

" n o m i n a t ~ o n f o r e l e c t i o n " o r t h e w o r d s , " e l i q i h l e

" .

: 4.

The l a s t matter J v a n t t.o d e a l w i t h i s t h a t flr.

Kennan conceded , and i f 1 may s a y so, p r o p e r l y c o n c e d e d , t h a t

1

i i f I l r . C o o n e y ' s c o n s t r u c t i o n of r u l e ? ? ( a ) i s cor rec t , i n the

s e n s e t h a t r a n k a n d f i l e members of t h e u n i o n are u n a b l e t o

h o l d t h e off ices c o n c e r n ? d , then t h e r e s p o n d e n t s c o u l d n o t

s e e k t o d e n y t h a t r u l e 22f.3) c o n t r a v e n e s S. 14O(l)(cl.

I n the c i r c u m s t a n c e s of t h e f i n d i n g s w h i c h J h a v e

made o n t h a t i s s u e a n d VI-. ICennan's concesslon, I c o n s i d e r

t h a t t h e p r o p e r Course, u n d e r S. 1 4 O ( C \ o f t h e A c t , IS t o

a d jol?rn t h e p r o c e e d i n g s fo r t h e p u r p o s e of q i v i n q t h e

o r g a n l z a t l o n a n o p p o r t u n l t y t o a l t e r i t s ru l e s . . . I n t h o s e

c i r c u m s t a n c e s I will a d ~ o u r n these n r o c e e d i n g s . T s u p p o s e it

i s best to f i x a d a t e so T h 7 1 1 1 a d ~ o u r n it t o Monday, 13

J u n e , 1983 a t 10 .15 i n M e l b o u r n e a n d there will he l i b e r t y t o

a n y p a r t y t o apply.