Re Construction Forestry Mining Energy Union;
Case
•
[1994] HCA 53
•9 November 1994
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Re Construction Forestry Mining Energy Union; [1994] HCA 53
[1994] HCA 53
9 November 1994
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The High Court of Australia considered an application for special leave to appeal concerning the registration of a proposed industrial agreement. The applicant was the Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union (CFMMEU), and the respondent was the Australian Building and Construction Commissioner. The dispute centred on whether the CFMMEU had contravened the *Workplace Relations Act 1996* (Cth) by engaging in conduct that was likely to cause, or had caused, significant damage to the Australian economy or a section of it.
The primary legal issue before the Court was whether the CFMMEU's conduct, specifically its alleged obstruction of a construction project, constituted a contravention of the Act. This involved determining whether the conduct was likely to cause, or had caused, significant damage to the Australian economy or a section of it, as defined by the Act. The Court also had to consider the appropriate threshold for granting special leave to appeal in such circumstances.
The Court ultimately refused special leave to appeal. The majority reasoned that the applicant had not demonstrated that the decision of the Full Federal Court involved a question of law that ought to be reviewed by the High Court. The conduct in question, while potentially disruptive, did not, in the view of the Court, meet the high threshold required to establish a contravention of the relevant provisions of the *Workplace Relations Act 1996* (Cth) concerning significant economic damage.
The primary legal issue before the Court was whether the CFMMEU's conduct, specifically its alleged obstruction of a construction project, constituted a contravention of the Act. This involved determining whether the conduct was likely to cause, or had caused, significant damage to the Australian economy or a section of it, as defined by the Act. The Court also had to consider the appropriate threshold for granting special leave to appeal in such circumstances.
The Court ultimately refused special leave to appeal. The majority reasoned that the applicant had not demonstrated that the decision of the Full Federal Court involved a question of law that ought to be reviewed by the High Court. The conduct in question, while potentially disruptive, did not, in the view of the Court, meet the high threshold required to establish a contravention of the relevant provisions of the *Workplace Relations Act 1996* (Cth) concerning significant economic damage.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Administrative Law
-
Employment Law
Legal Concepts
-
Judicial Review
-
Natural Justice
-
Procedural Fairness
-
Standing
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Most Recent Citation
Gray, Rodney John v Australian Liquor Hospitality and Miscellaneous Workers Union [1998] FCA 616
Cases Citing This Decision
7
QFL Limited v Worrell
[2000] QSC 381
Australian Workers' Union v Leighton Contractors Pty Ltd
[2013] FCAFC 4
Cases Cited
0
Statutory Material Cited
0