One Tree Community Services Inc v United Voice

One Tree Community Services Inc brought proceedings against United Voice in the Federal Court, challenging the jurisdiction of the Fair Work Commission to arbitrate a dispute concerning the payment of redundancy and recognition of service for employees transferred from One Tree to United Voice. The dispute arose from the transfer of employees under an Enterprise Agreement (EA) between One Tree and the Australian Council of Trade Unions. United Voice, although not a party to the EA, initiated the dispute with the Commission. The central legal issues were whether the new employer had 'consented' to arbitration, the scope of the agreement to arbitrate, and whether the Commission would be exercising judicial power in arbitrating the dispute. Additionally, the Court considered whether the Commission's arbitration would infringe Chapter III of the Constitution.

The Court found that the Commission had jurisdiction to arbitrate the dispute. It held that One Tree's contention about the Commission's jurisdiction was arguable and that the balance of convenience favoured resolving the issue in the Federal Court rather than the Commission. The Court reasoned that the dispute had wide implications for industrial relations and that resolving it in the Federal Court would prevent potential conflicts and penal consequences if One Tree's contention were incorrect. The Court also noted that the balance of convenience and the interests of justice favoured an early resolution of the jurisdictional issue. Consequently, the Court granted an interlocutory injunction restraining the Commission from hearing or determining the dispute until the Court's final decision.

The Court’s decision emphasised the legislative character of enterprise agreements and the role of unions in initiating disputes under such agreements. It also considered the constitutional implications of the Commission's arbitration powers. The Court concluded that the case was arguable and that the balance of convenience and the interests of justice supported an early resolution by the Court.

The Court made orders restraining the Commission from proceeding with the arbitration of the dispute until the Court's decision, with the orders being stayed for 48 hours to allow the Commission to consider whether to adjourn the arbitration. Costs were reserved.