RE HARRISON; EX PARTE HAMES [2015] WASC 247

Jurisdiction:	SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA	Citation No:	[2015] WASC 247
Case No:	CIV:2543/2014	Heard:	2 JUNE 2015
Coram:	BEECH J	Delivered:	21/07/15
No of pages:	29	Judgment Part:	1 of 1
Result:	Declaration that Industrial Relations Commission exceeded its jurisdiction
Category:	B
PDF Version

Parties:	DR KIM HAMES MLA, MINISTER FOR HEALTH MICHAEL MISCHIN MLC, MINISTER FOR COMMERCE COMMISSIONER J L HARRISON, WESTERN AUSTRALIAN INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS COMMISSIONER
Catchwords:	Administrative law Whether Industrial Relations Commission exceeded its powers in registering industrial agreement with provision included by order of the Commission under Industrial Relations Act 1979 (WA) s 42G Industrial relations Industrial agreements Proper construction of industrial agreement Whether term included in agreement by order under Industrial Relations Act s 42G must be with respect to an industrial matter
Legislation:	Industrial Relations Act 1979 (WA), s 42G
Case References:	Ainsworth v Criminal Justice Commission [1992] HCA 10; (1992) 175 CLR 564 Amcor Ltd v Construction, Forestry, Mining & Energy Union [2005] HCA 10; (2005) 222 CLR 241 AMS v AIF (1999) 199 CLR 160 Attorney General (WA) v Her Honour Judge Schoombee [2012] WASCA 29 Automotive, Food, Metals, Engineering, Printing & Kindred Industries Union v Electrolux Home Products Pty Ltd (2002) 118 FCR 177 Butler v St John of God Health Care Inc [2008] WASCA 174 Director General, Department of Education v United Voice WA [2013] WASCA 287 Electricity Generation Corporation v Woodside Energy Ltd [2014] HCA 7; (2014) 251 CLR 640 Electrolux Home Products Pty Ltd v Australian Workers' Union (2004) 221 CLR 309 Executive Director Department of Education; The Liquor Hospitality and Miscellaneous Union (WA Branch) [2010] WAIRC 00335 Hanssen Pty Ltd v Construction, Forestry, Mining & Energy Union [2004] 84 WAIG 694 Henderson v Pioneer Homes Pty Ltd [No 2] (1980) 43 FLR 276 Kidd v The State of Western Australia [2014] WASC 99 Kirk v Industrial Court of New South Wales [2010] HCA 1; (2010) 239 CLR 531 Kucks v CSR Ltd (1996) 66 IR 182 Primewest (Mandurah) Pty Ltd v Ryom Pty Ltd [2014] WASCA 28 Public Service Association of South Australia Inc v Industrial Relations Commission of South Australia [2012] HCA 25; (2012) 249 CLR 398 Red Hill Iron Ltd v API Management Pty Ltd [2012] WASC 323 The Minister for Health v Australian Nursing Federation, Industrial Union of Workers Perth [2014] WAIRC 00818 The Minister for Health v Australian Nursing Federation, Industrial Union of Workers Perth [2014] WAIRC 01235

JURISDICTION : SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA

IN CHAMBERS

CITATION : RE HARRISON; EX PARTE HAMES [2015] WASC 247 CORAM : BEECH J HEARD : 2 JUNE 2015 DELIVERED : 21 JULY 2015 FILE NO/S : CIV 2543 of 2014 EX PARTE

DR KIM HAMES MLA, MINISTER FOR HEALTH

First Applicant

MICHAEL MISCHIN MLC, MINISTER FOR COMMERCE

Second Applicant

AND

COMMISSIONER J L HARRISON, WESTERN AUSTRALIAN INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS COMMISSIONER

Respondent

Catchwords:

Administrative law - Whether Industrial Relations Commission exceeded its powers in…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Re Harrison and more:

Read every judgment in full
Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
Download judgments as PDF or Word

Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details

Case: [2015] WASC 247
Decision Date: 21 JULY 2015

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Re Harrison involved the Industrial Relations Commission (WA) and the decision to register an industrial agreement that included a provision mandated by the Commission under section 42G of the Industrial Relations Act 1979 (WA). The primary dispute centred on whether the Industrial Relations Commission had the authority to include a term in an industrial agreement through a directive under the Act, and if such a term could be considered an industrial matter. The High Court of Australia was called upon to determine these legal questions.

The legal issues before the court were whether the Industrial Relations Commission had exceeded its jurisdictional boundaries by incorporating a term into an industrial agreement through an order made under section 42G of the Industrial Relations Act, and whether the term in question was an industrial matter within the meaning of the Act. The court was tasked with interpreting the proper scope of the Commission's powers and the definition of an industrial matter.

In its judgment, the High Court found that the Industrial Relations Commission had overstepped its jurisdictional limits by including a term in the industrial agreement through an order under section 42G of the Act. The court held that the term mandated by the Commission was not an industrial matter and, therefore, the inclusion of such a term exceeded the Commission's authority. Consequently, the court ruled that the Commission's decision to register the industrial agreement was invalid.

The final orders of the court declared that the Industrial Relations Commission had exceeded its jurisdiction by including a term in the industrial agreement through an order under section 42G of the Industrial Relations Act. The court's decision provided clarity on the scope of the Commission's powers and the definition of industrial matters, impacting future industrial agreements and Commission decisions.

Orders

Orders of the court

Declaration that Industrial Relations Commission exceeded its jurisdiction

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.