Patrick Stevedores Operations No 2 Pty Ltd v Maritime Union of Australia

Patrick Stevedores Operations No 2 Pty Ltd and other companies (the applicants) sought to appeal a decision of the Full Court of the Federal Court of Australia concerning interlocutory injunctions. The dispute arose from actions taken by the applicants, which the Maritime Union of Australia and other employees (the respondents) alleged were designed to terminate their employment due to union membership, in contravention of the Workplace Relations Act 1996 (Cth). The respondents sought injunctions to prevent the termination of labour supply agreements, the dismissal of employees, and the disposal of company assets.

The High Court was required to determine whether the Federal Court had the power to grant interlocutory injunctions that would fetter the discretion of administrators appointed under Part 5.3A of the Corporations Law. Specifically, the Court had to consider whether such injunctions could compel companies to trade while insolvent, whether they were necessary to prevent the frustration of the administration process, and whether they were confined to maintaining the status quo or could protect the subject matter of litigation by conferring greater rights than existed at the time of the application. The Court also considered the application of section 298U of the Workplace Relations Act 1996 (Cth) in relation to the conduct of employers and the potential for conspiracy.

The High Court reasoned that while the Federal Court possessed broad jurisdiction to grant injunctions under the Workplace Relations Act and the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth), this power was limited by the need for orders to be "appropriate" in all the circumstances. The Court acknowledged the significant powers vested in administrators under the Corporations Law, including control over the company's business and the discretion to terminate or dispose of assets. It held that the exercise of the Federal Court's jurisdiction must operate in conjunction with, and not override, the statutory powers and duties of administrators. The Court found that the orders made by the Full Court had unduly fettered the administrators' discretion and potentially compelled the companies to trade while insolvent, contrary to their responsibilities under the Corporations Law.

The High Court allowed the appeal in part. It varied the orders of the Full Court to ensure that any injunctions granted were made subject to the powers of the administrators and that liberty to apply was reserved upon the administration ending. The Court also varied an undertaking regarding costs and remitted the matter of costs in the Federal Court proceedings to that Court.