Johanson v Queensland Teachers Union of Employees and Ruttiman (No. 2) - [2025] QIRC 191

INDUSTRIAL REGISTRAR

CITATION:	Johanson v Queensland Teachers Union of Employees and Ruttiman (No. 2) [2025] QIRC 191
PARTIES:	Johanson, Madonna (Applicant) v Queensland Teachers Union of Employees (First Respondent) and Ruttiman, Kate (Second Respondent)
CASE NO:	RIO/2025/83
PROCEEDING:	Application for an election inquiry
DELIVERED ON: HEARING DATE:	28 July 2025 On the papers
MEMBER:	Industrial Registrar Shelley
ORDERS: CATCHWORDS:	Pursuant to s 690 of the Industrial Relations Act 2016, the application filed on 7 May 2025 will not be referred to the Commission to conduct an election inquiry as the elections are not an election for the Queensland Teachers Union of Employees registered under the Industrial Relations Act 2016. INDUSTRIAL LAW – QUEENSLAND – REGISTERED INDUSTRIAL ORGANISATIONS - Application for an election inquiry - Industrial Registrar may refer the application to the Commission - Preliminary issue for determination - Whether one or more of the three ballots that are the subject of the election is an "election" for the purposes of the Industrial Relations Act 2016 - Determined not to be an "election" in terms of the rules of the organisation - Whether application is one for referral to the Commission for an election inquiry - Not referred.
LEGISLATION AND OTHER INSTRUMENTS: CASES:	Industrial Relations Act 2016, s 595, s 597, s 599, s 687, s 688, s 689, s 690, s 802, s 817, Schedule 5 Fair Work (Registered Organisations) Act 2016 Queensland Teachers' Union of Employees Constitution and Rules, r 1.6, r 3.1(a), r 3.4, r 6.2 Rules of the Australian Education Union, r 2, r 7, r 21, r 30, r 31, Appendix A Hodge v The King [1907] HCA 68 Johanson v Queensland Teachers Union of Employees and Ruttiman [2025] QIRC 130

Reasons for Decision

Introduction

On 7 May 2025, Ms Madonna Johanson (Applicant) filed in the Industrial Registry an application for an election inquiry pursuant to s 687 of the Industrial Relations Act2016 (the Act) with regards to three elections for Australian Education Union (AEU) Federal Conference Delegates.
On 8 May 2025, the Queensland Teachers Union of Employees (First Respondent/QTU) filed in the Industrial Registry a Form 34 - Lawyer's notice of address for service and subsequently on 9 May 2025 filed in the Industrial Registry an application in existing proceedings seeking permission to be legally represented in this matter.
On 13 May 2025 I issued an Order granting leave for the First Respondent to be legally represented pursuant to s 530(1)(g)(i) of the Act.
In response to correspondence received from the Applicant on 15 May 2025 seeking an injunction against the ratifying AEU Federal Conference Delegate elections at the QTU May Council on 17 May 2025, I issued a notice of listing for a hearing to be held on 16 May 2025.
On 15 May 2025, Ms Kate Ruttiman (Second Respondent) advised the Industrial Registry that she did not wish to be heard in the matter and "…will abide by the decisions of the commission".
The hearing for interim…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading Johanson v Queensland Teachers Union of Employees and Ruttim...

Details

AGLC: Johanson v Queensland Teachers Union of Employees and Ruttiman (No. 2) [2025] QIRC 191
Case: [2025] QIRC 191
Decision Date: 28 July 2025 On the papers

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Johanson v Queensland Teachers Union of Employees and Ruttiman (No. 2) involves an application by Johanson for an election inquiry under the Industrial Relations Act 2016. The application was directed at the Queensland Teachers Union of Employees (QTEU) and its affiliated entity, Ruttiman. The central issue revolved around the interpretation of the term "election" within the context of the QTEU's rules and the Act. Specifically, Johanson sought to determine whether three ballots were elections that required an inquiry under the Commission.

The legal issues that emerged from this application required the court to determine whether the three ballots were indeed "elections" as defined under the QTEU's rules and the Industrial Relations Act 2016. This interpretation was critical as it would dictate whether the Industrial Registrar had the authority to refer the matter to the Commission for an election inquiry. The court had to scrutinise the QTEU's rules and the statutory provisions to ascertain the applicability of the term "election" in this context.

The court concluded that the three ballots were not elections in the terms of the QTEU's rules and the Industrial Relations Act 2016. The court found that the ballots did not meet the criteria of an election as stipulated by the organisation's rules and the relevant legislative provisions. As a result, the application by Johanson for an election inquiry was dismissed, and the matter was not referred to the Commission for further inquiry. This decision underscored the importance of adherence to the specific definitions and criteria outlined in the organisation's rules and the applicable statutes.

Pursuant to section 690 of the Industrial Relations Act 2016, the application filed by Johanson on 7 May 2025 was not referred to the Commission for an election inquiry. The court's decision hinged on the interpretation that the ballots in question did not qualify as elections under the QTEU's rules and the Act, thus precluding the need for further investigation by the Commission.

Orders

Orders of the court

Pursuant to s 690 of the Industrial Relations Act 2016, the application filed on 7 May 2025 will not be referred to the Commission to conduct an election inquiry as the elections are not an election for the Queensland Teachers Union of Employees registered under the Industrial Relations Act 2016.

INDUSTRIAL LAW – QUEENSLAND – REGISTERED INDUSTRIAL ORGANISATIONS - Application for an election inquiry - Industrial Registrar may refer the application to the Commission - Preliminary issue for determination - Whether one or more of the three ballots that are the subject of the election is an "election" for the purposes of the Industrial Relations Act 2016 - Determined not to be an "election" in terms of the rules of the organisation - Whether application is one for referral to the Commission for an election inquiry - Not referred.

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.