Kelsey v Logan City Council

Link copied
Case Copied 46 min read

QUEENSLAND INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS COMMISSION

CITATION:

 Kelsey v Logan City Council & Ors [2018] QIRC 108

PARTIES:     

Kelsey, Sharon Rae Marie
(Applicant)

v

Logan City Council
(First Respondent)

&

Smith, Timothy Luke
(Second Respondent)

&

Dalley, Cherie Marie
(Third Respondent)

&

Lutton, Russell Bruce
(Fourth Respondent)

&

Swenson, Stephen Frederick
(Fifth Respondent)

&

Smith, Laurence William
(Sixth Respondent)

&

Pidgeon, Philip Wayne
(Seventh Respondent)

&

Schwarz, Trevina Dale
(Eighth Respondent)

&
Breene, Jennifer Rachael Julie
(Ninth Respondent)

CASE NO:

 PID/2017/3

PROCEEDING:

 Application for Interim Orders

DELIVERED ON:

 24 August 2018

HEARING DATES: 

2 August 2018

MEMBER:

HEARD AT:

Black IC

Brisbane

ORDERS:

1.       Attendance notice to produce set aside

2.       Application to inspect and copy documents dismissed
CATCHWORDS:

INDUSTRIAL LAW – APPLICATION S TO SET ASIDE ATTENDANCE NOTICE TO PRODUCE  – whether notice correctly issued under subdivision 7 of the rules - objections to notice – applications to set aside notices – whether derivative use of materials obtained by compulsion could be used in a collateral civil proceeding – whether implied limitation on the use of materials obtained by compulsion. 

LEGISLATION:

CASES:

Public Interest Disclosure Act 2010 (Qld), s 48
Industrial Relations Act 2016 (Qld), s 285
Industrial Relations (Tribunals) Rules 2011 (Qld), Part 2 Division 2, subdivision 7, subdivision 7A
Crime and Corruption Act 2001 (Qld), Chapter 2, Chapter 3, s 33, s 34, s 60, s 62, s 197

Trade Practices Commission v Arnotts Limited (19889) 88 ALR 657
Xstrata Queensland Ltd v Santos Ltd & Ors [2005] QSC 323
Leighton Contractors Pty Ltd v Western Metals Resources Limited [2000] QSC 27
National Employers’ Mutual General Association Ltd v Waind and Hill [1978] 1 NSWLR 372
Commissioner for Railways (NSW) v Small (1938) 38 SR (NSW) 564
Alder v Khoo & Ors [2010] QCA 360
Marsden v Amalgamated Television Services Pty Ltd [1999] NSWSC 619
Marra Developments Ltd (No. 2) (1979) 4 ACLR 153
Shaw v Yaranova & Anor [2001] VSCA 55
NSW Crime Commission v Hawes (1992) 74 A Crim R 199
Weston and Parer v State of Queensland (Department of Justice and Attorney-General) (No. 4) [2016] QIRC 075
Attorney-General for New South Wales v Stuart (1994) 34 NSWLR 667
Gary Jibson v Q-Comp W/C 2013/145 18 July 2013
Kelsey v Logan City Council & Ors [2018] QIRC 099
Sogelease Australia Ltd & Anor v David James Griffin & Ors [2003] NSWSC 178
Clayton Utz (A Firm) v Dale [2015] 47 VR 48
Australian Securities Commission v Mining Projects Group Limited (2007) 65 ACSR 264
Johns v Australian Securities Commission (1993) 178 CLR 408
Wayne Lawrence Pty Ltd v Hunt [1999] NSWSC 1044
Deputy Commissioner of Taxation v De Vonk (1995) 61 FCR 564
Williams v Keelty (2001) 111 FCR 175
Flori v Commissioner of Police [2014] QSC 284
R v Leach [2018] QCA 131
Pioneer Concrete Pty Ltd v Trade Practices Commission (1982) 152 CLR 460
Potter v Minaham (1908) 7 CLR 277

Grollo v Macauley (1995) 56 FCR 533

Hart v Australian Federal Police (2002) 124…

CaseChat AU logo

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Kelsey v Logan City Council and more:

  • Read every judgment in full
  • Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
  • See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
  • Download judgments as PDF or Word
Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details
Case
[2018] QIRC 108
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The plaintiff, Kelsey, made an application to set aside an attendance notice to produce documents issued by the Logan City Council. The dispute arose from a proceeding brought by the plaintiff against the Council, in which the Council had issued a notice requiring the plaintiff to produce certain documents. The plaintiff objected to the notice, contending that it was not correctly issued under the relevant rules, and applied to have it set aside. The Council, in turn, applied to inspect and copy the documents in question, claiming that the documents were relevant to the proceeding and could be used in a collateral civil proceeding. The case was heard in the Supreme Court of Queensland.

The legal issues the court was required to decide were whether the attendance notice to produce was correctly issued under subdivision 7 of the rules, whether the objections to the notice were valid, and whether the materials obtained by compulsion could be used in a collateral civil proceeding. The court had to determine whether there was an implied limitation on the use of materials obtained by compulsion.

The court found that the attendance notice to produce was not correctly issued, as it did not specify the documents in question or the purpose for which they were required. The court also found that the objections to the notice were valid, and set the notice aside. The court dismissed the Council's application to inspect and copy the documents, finding that there was an implied limitation on the use of materials obtained by compulsion in a collateral civil proceeding. The court held that such materials could not be used for any purpose other than the proceeding in which they were obtained.

The court set aside the attendance notice to produce and dismissed the application to inspect and copy the documents. The court's decision highlights the importance of correctly issuing attendance notices and the limitations on the use of materials obtained by compulsion.

Orders

Orders of the court

1. Attendance notice to produce set aside

2. Application to inspect and copy documents dismissed

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.