Lend Lease Project Management & Construction (Australia) Pty Ltd v Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union (No 5)
Case
•
[2012] FCA 1144
•19 October 2012
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Lend Lease Project Management & Construction (Australia) Pty Ltd v Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union (No 5) [2012] FCA 1144
[2012] FCA 1144
19 October 2012
CaseChat Overview and Summary
Lend Lease Project Management & Construction (Australia) Pty Ltd initiated proceedings against the Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union and other respondents, alleging unlawful industrial action in breach of the Building and Construction Industry Improvement Act 2005 (Cth). The respondents admitted to the breaches and the parties reached an agreement on the quantum of penalties and the terms of injunctive relief. The court was required to decide whether to give effect to the agreement, considering the principles relevant to the imposition of penalties by the court.
The court noted that while the imposition of penalties was ultimately a judicial task, it should give weight to any agreement reached by the parties regarding penalties. The court also considered the purpose of penalties, which include punishment, deterrence, and rehabilitation. The court found that the agreed penalties were within the permissible range, and neither manifestly excessive nor manifestly inadequate, having regard to the conduct in question. The court further noted that the total amount of the penalties agreed by the parties was appropriate. The court also considered the injunctive relief and bank guarantee offered by the respondents and invited the parties to make further submissions in relation to those issues.
The court ordered that a total penalty of $550,000 be imposed on the first, fourth, and fifth respondents, with the penalty to be paid to Lend Lease. Penalties of varying amounts were imposed on the individual respondents, with the penalties to be paid to the Commonwealth. The court also ordered that the parties file written submissions in respect of undertakings and injunctions and adjourned the proceedings for argument concerning undertakings and injunctions. Each party was ordered to pay its own costs of the proceedings.
The court noted that while the imposition of penalties was ultimately a judicial task, it should give weight to any agreement reached by the parties regarding penalties. The court also considered the purpose of penalties, which include punishment, deterrence, and rehabilitation. The court found that the agreed penalties were within the permissible range, and neither manifestly excessive nor manifestly inadequate, having regard to the conduct in question. The court further noted that the total amount of the penalties agreed by the parties was appropriate. The court also considered the injunctive relief and bank guarantee offered by the respondents and invited the parties to make further submissions in relation to those issues.
The court ordered that a total penalty of $550,000 be imposed on the first, fourth, and fifth respondents, with the penalty to be paid to Lend Lease. Penalties of varying amounts were imposed on the individual respondents, with the penalties to be paid to the Commonwealth. The court also ordered that the parties file written submissions in respect of undertakings and injunctions and adjourned the proceedings for argument concerning undertakings and injunctions. Each party was ordered to pay its own costs of the proceedings.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Employment & Labour Law
Legal Concepts
-
Unlawful Industrial Action
-
Penalties
-
Injunctive Relief
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Most Recent Citation
Australian Building and Construction Commissioner v Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union (The U-Vet School Case) [2022] FCA 1068
Cases Citing This Decision
24
Australian Building and Construction Commissioner v Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union
[2016] FCCA 3265
Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union v Director of the Fair Work Building Industry Inspectorate
[2014] FWCFB 7194
Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union
[2014] FWCFB 6497
Cases Cited
16
Statutory Material Cited
6
White v Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union
[2011] FCA 192