Textile Clothing and Footwear Union of Australia v Morrison Country Clothing Australia Pty Ltd
Case
•
[2008] FCA 604
•5 September 2008
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Textile Clothing and Footwear Union of Australia v Morrison Country Clothing Australia Pty Ltd [2008] FCA 604
[2008] FCA 604
5 September 2008
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The Textile Clothing and Footwear Union of Australia has brought proceedings against Morrison Country Clothing Australia Pty Ltd and its sole director, Brian Morrison, alleging contempt of Court. The Union claims that the respondents have failed to comply with orders made by the Court on 28 September 2007, which required Mr Morrison to give discovery of certain documents and allow inspection of those documents. The Union argues that the respondents’ failure to comply with the orders was wilful and not accidental or unintentional, and seeks a finding of contempt against the respondents.
The Court considered whether the respondents had breached the orders and whether the breach was wilful. The Court found that the orders were clear and unambiguous and that the respondents had knowledge of the terms of the orders. The Court also found that the respondents had failed to comply with the orders and that the non-compliance was not accidental or unintentional. The Court held that Mr Morrison was responsible for complying with the orders on behalf of the company and on his own behalf, and would be personally liable for any non-compliance.
The Court found the charges against the respondents established beyond reasonable doubt and will hear the parties as to what, if any, penalties should be imposed. The Court adjourned the hearing of the contempt motion and ordered the parties to file and serve certain affidavits and outlines of their written submissions before the penalty hearing.
The Court considered whether the respondents had breached the orders and whether the breach was wilful. The Court found that the orders were clear and unambiguous and that the respondents had knowledge of the terms of the orders. The Court also found that the respondents had failed to comply with the orders and that the non-compliance was not accidental or unintentional. The Court held that Mr Morrison was responsible for complying with the orders on behalf of the company and on his own behalf, and would be personally liable for any non-compliance.
The Court found the charges against the respondents established beyond reasonable doubt and will hear the parties as to what, if any, penalties should be imposed. The Court adjourned the hearing of the contempt motion and ordered the parties to file and serve certain affidavits and outlines of their written submissions before the penalty hearing.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Civil Litigation & Procedure
Legal Concepts
-
Discovery & Disclosure
-
Contempt of Court
-
Jurisdiction
-
Breach of Contract
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Most Recent Citation
Hurd v Zomojo Pty Ltd [2015] FCAFC 148
Cases Citing This Decision
4
Hurd v Zomojo Pty Ltd
[2015] FCAFC 148
Textile Clothing and Footwear Union of Australia v Morrison Country Clothing Australia Pty Ltd (No 2)
[2008] FCA 1965
Hurd v Zomojo Pty Ltd
[2015] FCAFC 148
Cases Cited
7
Statutory Material Cited
0
Rich v Australian Securities and Investments Commission
[2004] HCA 42
Doyle v The Commonwealth
[1985] HCA 46
Rich v Australian Securities and Investments Commission
[2004] HCA 42