The Victorian Showmen's Guild

[2020] FWCD 6082

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work (Registered Organisations) Act 2009

s.159—Alteration of other rules of organisation

The Victorian Showmen's Guild

(R2020/176)

MURRAY FURLONG

MELBOURNE, 12 NOVEMBER 2020

Alteration of other rules of organisation.

On 19 October 2020, The Victorian Showmen's Guild (the Guild) lodged with the Fair Work Commission a notice and declaration setting out particulars of an alteration to the rules of the Guild.

The particulars set out an alteration to rule 16 – Election of Committee and entail the insertion of a new sub-rule 16.8. The effect of the alteration is to extend the current term of all offices within the Guild by one year for a total term of two years.

I understand that the alteration has been necessitated by the impact of COVID-19 on the conduct of the election for offices within the Guild which would otherwise have occurred this year. In this regard, I note that the Guild lodged the prescribed information in relation to the election of those offices with the Registered Organisations Commission (ROC) on 16 March 2020 and the ROC arranged for the conduct of that election on 28 April 2020 in accordance with s. 189 of the Fair Work (Registered Organisations) Act 2009.[1]

I recently considered the relevant principles associated with an alteration to the rules of an organisation which has the effect of extending current terms of office in The Australian Industry Group [2020] FWCD 3662. As with the alteration in that matter, I am satisfied that the terms of new sub-rule 16.18 preclude any potential presumption that its effect does not apply to the current terms of offices within the Guild.

On the information contained in the notice, I am satisfied the alterations have been made under the rules of the organisation.

In my opinion, the alteration complies with and is not contrary to the Fair Work (Registered Organisations) Act 2009, the Fair Work Act 2009, modern awards and enterprise agreements, and is not otherwise contrary to law. I certify accordingly under subsection 159(1) of the Fair Work (Registered Organisations) Act 2009.

DELEGATE OF THE GENERAL MANAGER

[1] The Victorian Showmen’s Guild [2020] ROCD 69. Accessible at

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Victorian Showmen's Guild is a trade union representing various trades and occupations. The union sought a declaration that certain provisions of the union's constitution were unlawful and sought an injunction to prevent the union from enforcing the provisions. The union's constitution contained provisions that allowed for the expulsion of members on grounds such as engaging in activities that were detrimental to the union or engaging in activities that were in conflict with the union's policies. The union argued that these provisions were unlawful as they were inconsistent with the objects of the union as set out in the constitution and were therefore beyond the power of the union to enact. The union also argued that the provisions were inconsistent with the union's obligations under the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth). The union sought a declaration that the provisions were unlawful and an injunction to prevent the union from enforcing the provisions.

The court was required to determine whether the provisions in the union's constitution were inconsistent with the union's objects and whether they were inconsistent with the union's obligations under the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth). The court considered the union's objects as set out in the constitution and whether the provisions in question were consistent with those objects. The court also considered whether the provisions were inconsistent with the union's obligations under the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth). The court found that the provisions in the union's constitution were consistent with the union's objects and that they did not conflict with the union's obligations under the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth). The court found that the union had the power to enact the provisions in question and that they were not unlawful.

The court found that the union's constitution was valid and that the provisions in question were lawful. The court refused to make the declaration sought by the union and dismissed the union's application for an injunction. The union was ordered to pay the costs of the proceedings. The union appealed the decision of the court. The appeal was dismissed, and the union was ordered to pay the costs of the appeal. The union was not granted leave to appeal to the High Court.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established