FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
RSA Express Pty Ltd v Guilfoyle [2020] FCA 1157
File number: QUD 401 of 2019 Judgment of: GREENWOOD J Date of judgment: 12 August 2020 Catchwords: CONSTITUTIONAL LAW – consideration of an application to dismiss paragraphs of an amended Statement of Claim which seek to plead relief based upon facts said to give rise to a claim of invalidity arising by operation of s 109 of the Constitution – consideration of a claim said to arise under s 117 of the Constitution – consideration of a claim said to arise under s 46(1)(a) of the Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (Cth) Legislation: Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (Cth), ss 2B, 46(1)(a), 80, 82
Competition Policy Reform (Queensland) Act 1996 (Qld), ss 3‑6, 8, 10, 13, 14
National Vocational Education and Training Regulator Act 2011 (Cth), ss 3‑6, 9, 11, 21‑29, 32‑34, 43, 44, 47, 48, 55, 56
Commonwealth Constitution, ss 51(i), (xix), (xx), (xxxvii); 92, 109, 117
National Vocational Education and Training Regulator (Consequential Amendments) Act 2011 (Cth)
National Vocational Education and Training Regulator (Transitional Provisions) Act 2011 (Cth)
Vocational Education and Training (Commonwealth Powers) Act 2012 (Qld)
Work Health and Safety Act 2011 (Qld), ss 3, 152‑154, 230‑267, 276; Schedule 2, ss 25‑27, 44, 48; Schedule 5, s 4
Work Health and Safety Act and Other Legislation Amendment Act 2017 (Qld)
Work Health and Safety Regulation 2011 (Qld), ss 289, 291, 298, 299, 316‑327; Schedule 19, s 5
Communiqués arising out of meetings of the Council of Australian Governments: 7 December 2009 (Brisbane); 13 February 2011 (Canberra); and 19 August 2011 (Canberra)
CPCCWHS1001 Prepare to Work Safely in the Construction Industry
Cases cited: Ansett Transport Industries (Operations) Pty Ltd v Wardley (1980) 142 CLR 237
APLA Limited v Legal Services Commissioner (NSW) (2005) 224 CLR 322
Henry v Boehm (1973) 128 CLR 482
Momcilovic v The Queen (2011) 245 CLR 1
New South Wales v The Commonwealth and Carlton (1983) 151 CLR 302
Street v Queensland Bar Association (1989) 168 CLR 461
Victoria v Commonwealth (1937) 58 CLR 618
Work Health Authority v Outback Ballooning Pty Ltd (2019) 93 ALJR 212
Division: General Division Registry: Queensland National Practice Area: Administrative and Constitutional Law and Human Rights Number of paragraphs: 151 Date of last submission/s: 12 November 2019 Date of hearing: 12 November 2019 Counsel for the Applicant: D A Savage QC and S R Grant Solicitor for the Applicant: Priority Business Lawyers Counsel for the Respondents: S J Keim SC and K Blore Solicitor for the Respondents: Crown Law ORDERS
QUD 401 of 2019 BETWEEN: RSA EXPRESS PTY LTD
Applicant
AND: AARON GUILFOYLE, WORK HEALTH AND SAFETY PROSECUTOR
First Respondent
STATE OF QUEENSLAND
Second Respondent
ORDER MADE BY:
GREENWOOD J
DATE OF ORDER:
12 AUGUST 2020
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1.Paragraphs 8(a) and 17‑29 of the Amended Statement of Claim filed on 1 October 2019 are struck out.
2.The applicant in the principal proceeding is given leave to file a Further Amended Statement of…
Continue reading RSA Express Pty Ltd v Guilfoyle
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- RSA Express Pty Ltd v Guilfoyle [2020] FCA 1157
- Case
- [2020] FCA 1157
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The central legal issues involved the validity of claims under sections 109, 117 of the Constitution, and section 46(1)(a) of the Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (Cth). The court needed to decide if the claims were justiciable and whether they were supported by the facts alleged. It was also necessary to consider whether the claims were properly pleaded and if they had a real prospect of success.
The court found that paragraphs 8(a) and 17-29 of the amended statement of claim did not adequately plead a claim of invalidity under section 109 of the Constitution. The claims under section 117 of the Constitution and section 46(1)(a) of the Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (Cth) were also dismissed as they were not supported by the facts or the law. Consequently, the court struck out these paragraphs and dismissed the proceedings against the first respondent, Aaron Guilfoyle. Additionally, the applicant was ordered to pay the costs of the respondents in relation to the interlocutory application.
The final orders of the court included the striking out of specific paragraphs of the amended statement of claim, the dismissal of proceedings against Aaron Guilfoyle, and an order for the applicant to pay costs. The applicant was granted leave to file a further amended statement of claim within 21 days. The entry of these orders was governed by Rule 39.32 of the Federal Court Rules 2011.
Orders
Orders of the court
1. Paragraphs 8(a) and 17‑29 of the Amended Statement of Claim filed on 1 October 2019 are struck out.
2. The applicant in the principal proceeding is given leave to file a Further Amended Statement of Claim (if any) within 21 days.
3. The proceedings as against the first respondent, Aaron Guilfoyle, Work Health and Safety Prosecutor, is dismissed.
4. The applicant in the principal proceeding pay the costs of the first and second respondents in the principal proceeding of and incidental to the interlocutory application of the respondents to the principal proceeding filed on 17 October 2019.
Note: Entry of orders is dealt with in Rule 39.32 of the Federal Court Rules 2011.
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.