Re: VICTORIA JANE McJANNET; CHARLES HENRY LIVINGSTONE and MEDIA, ENTERTAINMENT
AND ARTS ALLIANCE (A registered Industrial Organisation of Employees pursuant
to the Industrial Relations Act 1988)
And: HERBERT WHITE; ARTHUR WESTBROOK; JAMES BEATTIE; MACQUARIE HAYWARD;
WILLIAM MORRIS; EDWARD EASTON and OTHERS
No. Q I4 of 1992
FED No. 848
Number of pages - 44
Industrial Law
(1992) 39 FCR 1
COURT
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
QUEENSLAND DISTRICT REGISTRY
INDUSTRIAL DIVISION
Ryan J.(1)
CATCHWORDS
Industrial Law - Unions - registration and incorporation of branch of federally-registered organisation under State legislation - construction of s.26 Industrial Arbitration Act 1916 (Qld) - whether separate legal entity created - effect of amalgamation on rights and obligations of de-registered organisations - construction of ss.6,7 Industrial Relations (Protection from Invalidities) Act 1991 (Qld) - whether registration of union creates proprietary interest in persons procuring registration
Industrial Relations Act 1988: ss.253Q, 253R, 253U, 298
Industrial Arbitration Act 1916 (Qld): s.26
Industrial Relations (Protection from Invalidities) Act 1991 (Qld): ss.4, 5, 6, 7
Bailey v Krantz (1985) 13 IR 339
Frizziero v Rice (Unreported, Full Court, Federal Court of Australia, 16 October 1992)
Williams Hursey (1959) 103 CLR 30
R v Cawthorne (1979) 22 SASR 433
John v Rees (1970) Ch 345
Nurses Memorial Centre of South Australia Inc. v Beaumont (1987) 44 SASR 454
Bacon v O'Dea (1989) 25 FCR 495
Allingham v Australian Workers' Union (1971) 21 FLR 228
In re Electrical Trades Union of Australia, New South Wales Branch (1963) AR (NSW) 796
Re Ferris (1982) 2 IR 432
HEARING
BRISBANE
#DATE 20:11:1992
Counsel for the applicants: Mr Rothman and Mr Boccabella
Solicitor for the applicants: Goss Downey Carne
Counsel for the first and
second respondents: Mr Herbert
Solicitor for the first and
second respondents: Dillons
Counsel for the third respondent
and the second intervener: Mr Martin
Solicitor for the third respondent
and the second intervener: Crown Law Office
Counsel for the fourth respondent
and the first intervener: Mr Hall
Solicitor for the fourth respondent
and the first intervener: C.A. Sciacca and Associates
ORDER
THE COURT ORDERS:
1. That the applicants have leave to amend their notice of appeal
from the orders of Ryan J made on 19 October 1992 in the light of his Honour's reasons for judgment herein published on 20 November 1992 in such manner as they may be advised, such amended notice of appeal to be filed and served within 21 days of this date.
2. That the District Registrar make available, upon request by the
legal advisers of any party or intervener, any of the materials filed herein, including any exhibits, for the purpose of perusal and/or copying within the precincts of the Registry of the Court.
Note: Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in O.36 of the Federal Court Rules.
JUDGE1
RYAN J. Pursuant to s.253Q of the Industrial Relations Act 1988 ("the Federal Act"), three organisations registered under that Act, the…
Continue reading McJannet v White
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- McJannet, V.A. & ors v White, H. & ors [1992] FCA 848 ((1992) 39 FCR 1)
- Case
- [1992] FCA 848
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The court meticulously analysed the statutory provisions, taking into account the legislative intent and the implications of the registrations and amalgamations on the legal status and liabilities of the unions involved. It was determined that the registration under state law did not create a separate legal entity but rather operated to recognise the branch's existence under federal law. The court also clarified that the registration did not automatically confer a proprietary interest in the persons who initiated the registration process, thus addressing concerns about the impact on the rights and obligations of the unions.
The court's decision provided clarity on the interplay between federal and state industrial laws, particularly regarding the registration and recognition of union branches. The final orders included granting the applicants leave to amend their notice of appeal, and directing the District Registrar to make available all materials filed in the case for perusal and copying within the precincts of the Court Registry. This ruling was instrumental in delineating the legal framework governing union registrations and amalgamations under the respective acts.
Orders
Orders of the court
THE COURT ORDERS:
1. That the applicants have leave to amend their notice of appeal
from the orders of Ryan J made on 19 October 1992 in the light of his Honour's reasons for judgment herein published on 20 November 1992 in such manner as they may be advised, such amended notice of appeal to be filed and served within 21 days of this date.
2. That the District Registrar make available, upon request by the
legal advisers of any party or intervener, any of the materials filed herein, including any exhibits, for the purpose of perusal and/or copying within the precincts of the Registry of the Court.
Note: Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in O.36 of the Federal Court Rules.
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.