Grocon Constructors (Queensland) Pty Ltd v Mason

Grocon Constructors (Queensland) Pty Ltd sought an interim order from the Supreme Court of Queensland to restrain the Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union (CFMMEU) and its officials from continuing to organise or encourage industrial action at the company's construction sites. The dispute arose from the union's alleged organisation of industrial action, which Grocon contended was unlawful and causing significant disruption to its projects.

The primary legal issue before the Court was whether it had the power to grant an interim injunction to preserve the status quo pending the determination of an interlocutory application concerning the lawfulness of the alleged industrial action. Specifically, the Court had to consider the principles governing the grant of interlocutory relief in the context of industrial disputes, including the balance of convenience and the likelihood of success on the merits.

Justice Burnett found that the Court possessed the necessary jurisdiction to grant interim relief to prevent the continuation or escalation of industrial action that was alleged to be unlawful. Applying the principles established in *Australian Broadcasting Corporation v O’Neill*, the Court considered the serious questions to be tried regarding the lawfulness of the union's conduct and the potential for irreparable harm to Grocon if the industrial action continued. The Court concluded that the balance of convenience favoured granting the injunction, as it would preserve the status quo and allow for a proper determination of the substantive issues without prejudice to either party.

The Court ordered that the CFMMEU and its officials be restrained from organising, encouraging, or continuing industrial action at Grocon's construction sites until the interlocutory application was heard and determined.