Squires, Lesley Andree v Pike, Lyne

In the case of Squires v Pike, the dispute arose between the plaintiff, a member of a union branch council, and the defendant, the union's national executive. The issue centred around the validity of certain resolutions passed by the incoming branch council following changes in union rules that did not include transitional provisions for existing councils. The plaintiff contested the removal of some members from the council and sought to validate the actions of the incoming council.

The court was required to determine several legal questions, including whether the resolutions passed by the incoming council were valid, and whether the removal of certain members from the council was legitimate. The court had to examine the union's constitution, the relevant industrial relations laws, and the procedural fairness of the council's actions. Additionally, the court needed to consider whether the union had taken steps to validate the resolutions after the fact.

The court found that the resolutions passed by the incoming council were not valid because the union's rules did not provide a transitional arrangement for existing councils. As a result, the removal of certain members from the council was also deemed invalid. The court noted that attempts to validate the resolutions after the fact did not remedy the initial procedural flaws. Consequently, the court answered the questions posed under Order 29, Rule 2, affirming the invalidity of the council's actions and the removal of members.

The court ordered that the questions raised for decision be answered in a way that confirms the invalidity of the resolutions and the removal of council members, reflecting the procedural deficiencies identified in the case. The specific answers provided to the questions underscored the lack of validity in the actions taken by the union's national executive.