' P
| ' SIN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA | ) |
| _ | - |
)
| QUEENSLAND DISTRICT REGISTRY | ) NO. Q2 of 1986 |
| 1 | |
| INDUSTRIAL DIVISION | 1 |
IN THE MATTER Of an auullcation bv Barrv Trevor Lihsket for a'n inquiry into
| an | election in | the |
| Federated | Clerks | Union | of |
| Australia |
(R NO. 113 Of 1986)
| AND IN | THE NATTER of a |
| reference | of | such |
| application | by | the |
Industrial Registrar to the
| Federal Court | of Australia |
| ! | 30 OCTOBER, 1987 | KEELY J. |
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
On Tuesday, 1 3 October 1987, the court made certain
i
orders under S. 165(3)(d) of the Conciliation and Arbitration Act
| I | ! ' |
| 1904 (the Act) | and reserved the delivery | of its reasons for making |
| those orders. Those reasons are | now given and are to be read | in |
| the light of the reasons for judgment delivered earlier | in this |
| matter (22 July 1987); the matters there | set out need not | be |
,
repeated.
| On 22 July 1987 the further hearing | of the matter was |
adjourned at the request of all the partles in both this matter
| and in matter No. Q3 | of | 1986. The two matters were closely |
related and to some extent overlap although the Irregularity found
!
| - | L | 2. |
| 'toyhave occurred in the present matter | was not a matter raised in |
| ;Y | r |
| -3tter No. Q3 of 1986. In that matter orders were also made on | 13 |
| October 1987 and reasons for judgment | In it have been delivered |
| this day. |
The orders made in the present matter were in the same
| terms as those made in matter | No. Q3 of 1986, save that the |
present orders related to only twelve of the thirty offices named
| in the orders made in matter | No. Q3. |
| In | the | present | matter | the | Court | was not asked | to |
| exercise its discretion against making any orders. However, | on |
| other matters the submissions made were similar in both matters | - |
| in | particular as to | the | proposed | orders | under | S. 165(3)(d) |
modifying the operation of the Branch Rules. Accordingly the
1.
| present reasons should | be read | as if there were incorporated | in |
them the relevant part of the reasons delivered today in matter
No. Q3 of 1986.
I certify that thls and the preceding page is a true copy of the Reasons f o r Judgment herein of the Honourable Mr. Justice Keelv.
| Dated: 30 October, | 1987 |
- AGLC
- Linsket, B.T., matter of an application for an inquiry into an election in the F.C.U. of Australia [1987] FCA 662
- Case
- [1987] FCA 662
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The primary legal issue was whether the irregularities in the election process were significant enough to warrant a re-election. The court had to assess the nature and extent of the irregularities and whether they had materially affected the outcome of the election. Additionally, the court had to consider the appropriate remedial action under section 165(3)(d) of the Conciliation and Arbitration Act 1904, including whether to modify the union's branch rules to prevent recurrence of similar issues.
In delivering the judgment, the court found that the irregularities in the election process were indeed significant and had materially affected the election outcome. The court was satisfied that a re-election was necessary to ensure the legitimacy and fairness of the union's leadership. The court also determined that modifying the union's branch rules was essential to prevent future irregularities. The court ordered a re-election for twelve of the thirty offices and made corresponding amendments to the union's branch rules to address the identified irregularities.
The court's final orders included the direction for a re-election of twelve union positions and modifications to the union's branch rules to ensure compliance with the requirements of the Conciliation and Arbitration Act 1904. The orders were designed to rectify the irregularities and restore the integrity of the union's electoral process.
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.