Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs v Gungor

[1982] FCA 99

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA	)
INDUSTRIAL DIVISION	) No. V30 of 1981
VICTORIA DISTRICT REGISTRY	)

On appeal from the judgment given and orders made by the

Honourable Mr. Justice Northrop	in the Industrial Dlvislon
of the Federal Court	of Australia.

B E T W E E N

THE HONOURABLE ROBERT IAN VINER (who sues as THE MINISTER OF STATE FOR INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS)

HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN IN RIGHT

OF THE STATE OF VICTORIA

and

HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN IN RIGHT

OF THE STATE OF WESTERN

AUSTRALIA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Applicants

-and-

L__-___-__-__--_--_-___	THE AUSTRALIAN BUILDING
CONSTRUCTION EMPLOYEES' AND BUILDERS LABOURERS" FEDERATION

Respondent

of Australia.

and for injunctions restraining the commission by David Syme & Co. Limlted of any further
contempt of the Federal Court

ORDER

J U D G E S I W K I N G ORDERS: Bowen C . J . , Evat t and Deane JJ.

WXERE MADE :	Melbourne
DATE :	31 May 1982

The C o m t o r d e r s t h a t :

1. The appeal be d lsmissed .

2 .	The Austral ian Bul lding Construct lon Employees ' and
Bui lders Labourers ' Federa t ion pay the costs of David

Syme & Co. Llmited of the motlon t o d ismiss the appea l

for want of competence and of t h e a p p e a l .

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA	1
INDUSTRIAL DIVISION	) No. V31 of 1981
VICTORIA DISTRICT REGISTRY	1
On appeal from the -judgment given and orders	made by the

Honourable Mr. Justice Northrop in the Industrial Dlvision

of the Federal Court of Australla.

B E T W E E N

THE HONOURABLE ROBERT IAN VINER

(who sues as THE MINISTER OF

STATE FOR INDUSTRIAL RELATION^

HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN IN RIGHT

OF THE STATE OF VICTORIA

and

HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN IN RIGHT _------------------_--- OF THE STATE OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA

Applicants

-and-

........ ........ .......	CONSTRUCTION EMPLOYEES' AND
THE AUSTRALIAN BUILDING
BUILDERS LABOURERS" FEDERATION

Respondent

contempt -of-~the Federal Court

of Australla and for

in-junctions restrainlng the

commission by Herald & Weekly

Times Limited of any further contempt of the Federal Court

of Australia.

ORDER

J U D G E S F X K I N G ORDERS:  Bowen C.J.. Eva t t and Deane JJ.

WHERE MADE:	Melbourne
DATE :	3 1 May  1982
The	Cour t o rde r s t ha t :

1.            The appeal be dismissed.

2. The Austral lan Bui ldlng Construct ion Employees ' and

B u i l d e r s Labourers ' Federa t ion pay the cos ts of Herald

&	Weekly T i m f s Limlted of	t h e	m o t l o n	t o	d i smiss	t h e
appeal	for	want	of competence	and	of	the appea l .

IN THE FEDERAL COURT	OF AUSTRALIA	1
INDUSTRIAL DIVISION	) No. V30 and V31

VICTORIA DISTRICT REGISTRY	) of 1981
On appeal from the judgment given and orders made by	the
Honourable Mr. Justice Northrop in the	Industrid Dlvision
of the Federal Court	of Australia.

B E T W E E N

THE HONOURABLE ROBERT IAN VINER
(who sues as THE MINISTER OF

STATE FOR INDUSTRIAL RELATION=

HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN IN RIGHT

OF THE STATE OF VICTORIA

and

HER YRJESTY THE QUEEN IN RIGHT

_ -- - _ -_ - _-_-_ O F T H E S T A T E -_-_ O F WESTERN -_----

AUSTRALIA

Applicants

-and-

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .	THE AUSTRALIAN BUILDING
CONSTRUCTION EMPLOYEES I AND
BUILDERS LABOURERS" FEDERATION

Respondent

of Australia and f o r

lnjunctions restralning the

commission by Davld Syme & Co. Llrnlted and Herald & Keekly Times Llmited of any further

contempt of the Federal Court

of Australia.

L .

CORAM:  Bowen C . J . , Evatt and Deane JJ.

31 May 1982

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

The re a r e be fo re us two appea ls f rom dec ls lons o f

Northrop J. dlsmissing	motions	brought	by	The	A u s t r a l l a n
B u i l d i n g	C o n s t r u c t i o n	E m p l o y e e s '	a n d	B u i l d e r s	L a b o u r e r s '

Fede ra t ion ( t he "Fede ra t ion" ) aga ins t David Syme & Company

Limlted and the Herald and Weekly Times L m l t e d . The appea l s

have been argued together . Prev lous ly we have heard two

motlons t o d l s m i s s t h e a p p e a l s on the g round t ha t t hey were

incompetent.	Except	t o	t h e e x t e n t	t o	wh ich t he appea l s r a l sed
for	c o n s i d e r a t i o n	t h e	propriety	of	o r d e r s for c o s t s made by

Northrop J. a g a i n s t t h e F e d e r a t l o n , we upheld those motlons

concerning competency. The a rgument regard ing cos ts of t h o s e

motlons has a lso been heard today.

The quest lon involved is t h e same i n r e l a t i o n t o

t h e costs awarded by Northrop J. and t h e c o s t s of the mot ions

concernlng competency. I t i s a narrow one. I t i s whether

t h e p r o c e e d i n g s f o r c o n t e m p t w e r e f o r t he p u r p o s e s of

s . l97A(b)	of	t h e	Conciliation	and	A r b i t r a t l o n	A c t 1904,	( t h e
" A c t " )	proceedings	" in	a	ma t t e r	a r i s ing" unde r	the	Act.

I t is conceded by sen lor counse l for the Federa t lon

t h a t , I n t h e l l g h t of what was s a l d i n t h e ~ u d g m e n t s l n t h e

High Court in the recent case of V i c t o r i a v . The A u s t r a l i a n

B u l l d i n ? C o n s t r u c t i o n E m p l o y e e s ' a n d E u i l d e r s L a b o u r e r s '

F e d e r a t l o n t h e c o n t e m p t p r o c e e d i n g s a r e , i n t h e m s e l v e s ,

proceedlngs	under	the	Federal	Court	of	Aus t r a l i a	Ac t .	I t	i s ,
however ,	submit ted	that ,	fo r	t h e	p u r p o s e s	o f	s . l 9 7 A ( b )	o f	t h e

Act , they should be seen as proceedings In a m a t t e r a r l s i n g

under the A c t , namely, the pendmg proceedlngs i n which

o r d e r s f o r d e r e g i s t r a t i o n of the Fede ra t lon are sought .

I n o u r v iew the con tempt p roceed lngs a r e s epa ra t e

and d is t inc t p roceedings . They cannot p roper ly , for the

purposes of s . l97A(b) be regarded as p r o c e e d i n g s I n t h e

d e r e g i s t r a t i o n p r o c e e d i n g s . The p a r t i e s a r e d i f f e r e n t , t h e

sublec t m a t t e r i s d i f f e r e n t and the p roceed ings a r e of a

c r lmlna l na ture . For the purposes of s. l97A(b) the contempt

proceedings are themse lves t he r e l evan t ma t t e r . A s has been

s a i d , It LS perforce conceded by sen ior counse l for the

F e d e r a t i o n t h a t t h o s e p r o c e e d i n g s d o n o t a r l s e u n d e r t h e

Act. I n t h e r e s u l t we would dismiss each appeal on the

quest ion of costs and would make o r d e r s f o r costs I n t h e

mctlons .

The o rde r i n t h e a p p e a l s and motlons w i l l be:

Appeal	dismlssed,	the	Federat ion	t o	p a y	t h e	o t h e r	p a r t y ' s
costs of the	motlon	t o	d i smis s	t he	appea l	fo r	wan t	of

competence and of the appeal.

, - ,, 7-

What the section requires is that the

clrcumstance (a) or (b) should occur by reason of the

existence of industrial action. There is no question that

it "existed1' until 8 : O O a.m. on 2 December 1981 and on

the facts agreed, it is clearly open to me	to find that any
inability to usefully employ the appllcant	or any serious

dlsruption,as at 11:30 a.m. that day,was by reason of it.

I therefore do not thlnk that the language of

the section requires me to hold that	a declaration made
after industrial action ceases is	not authorised by it.