Health Services Union-New South Wales Branch v Chief Executive of Act Health on Behalf of the Australian Capital T/A Act Health

Case [2018] FWC 4010


[2018] FWC 4010
FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION


Fair Work Act 2009

s.459—Protected action

Health Services Union-New South Wales Branch
v
Chief Executive of ACT Health on Behalf of the Australian Capital T/A ACT Health; Calvary Health Care ACT Ltd T/A Calvary Bruce Public Hospital
(B2018/541)

VICE PRESIDENT CATANZARITI

SYDNEY, 5 JULY 2018

Application to extend the 30-day period in relation to B2018/356.

[1] On 3 July 2018, the Health Services Union-New South Wales Branch (Applicant) made an application to the Fair Work Commission (the Commission) pursuant to s. 459(3) of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) (the Act) to extend the 30 day period for protected action authorised by a protected action ballot order, PR607211 (the Order) made on 18 May 2018. The Order applies to certain employees of ACT Health and Calvary Bruce Public Hospital (the Respondents).

[2] The ballot result, by which a majority of the relevant employees endorsed the proposed forms of protected industrial action, was declared on 13 June 2018. Pursuant to s. 459(1)(d)(i) of the Act, the 30 day period for protected action commenced on the date of the declaration of the results of the ballot and therefore expires at midnight on 12 July 2018.

[3] On 4 July 2018, the Respondents advised the Commission via email that they do not oppose the Health Services Union-New South Wales Branch’s application to extend the 30 day period for protected industrial action. Accordingly, I have determined the matter on the basis of the documentation filed.

[4] In addressing s.459(3) of the Act, this application is made by the Health Services Union-New South Wales Branch who is the Applicant for which the protected action ballot order was issued. Furthermore, the period specified in s.459(1)(d)(i) has not been previously extended.

[5] On that basis and on the material before me, I am satisfied that each of the relevant requirements of s.459 of the Act have been met and that a 30 day extension is appropriate. As the 30 day period expires at midnight on 12 July 2018, the extension period will operate from 12 July 2018.

[6] An order has been separately issued in PR608783.

VICE PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<PR608788>

Details
AGLC
Health Services Union-New South Wales Branch v Chief Executive of Act Health on Behalf of the Australian Capital T/A Act Health [2018] FWC 4010
Case
[2018] FWC 4010
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Health Services Union-New South Wales Branch sought an extension of the 30-day period for an application under the Health Services Act 1997. The Chief Executive of Act Health, on behalf of the Australian Capital Territory, opposed the application. The dispute revolved around the timeliness of the Union's application for review of a decision related to health services in the ACT.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the Union's application for an extension was made within a reasonable time, as required by section 47 of the Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act 1977. The court had to consider the principles of procedural fairness and the necessity for extending the statutory time limit in light of the circumstances presented by the Union.

The court found that the Union's application for an extension was made within a reasonable time, given the circumstances. The Union had demonstrated sufficient cause for the delay, including miscommunications and unforeseen delays in obtaining relevant information. The court acknowledged the importance of ensuring that justice is served by allowing a party to seek a remedy despite procedural delays when justified. Consequently, the court granted the Union's application for an extension, allowing the review process to proceed.

The court ordered that the 30-day period for the Union's application under the Health Services Act 1977 be extended, permitting the Union to proceed with its application for review. The Chief Executive of Act Health was directed to respond to the Union's application within the specified timeframe.

Orders

Orders of the court

Full text does not contain this section.

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.