Patrick Stevedores Operations No 2 Pty Ltd v Maritime Union of Australia

Last updated

Patrick Stevedores Operations No 2 Pty Ltd v Maritime Union of Australia
Coat of Arms of Australia.svg
Court High Court of Australia
Decided4 May 1998
Citation(s) [1998] HCA 30, (1998) 195  CLR  1
Court membership
Judge(s) sitting Gaudron, McHugh, Gummow, Kirby, Hayne & Callinan JJ

Patrick Stevedores Operations No 2 Pty Ltd v Maritime Union of Australia [1998] HCA 30 is an Australian labour law case in the High Court which culminated the legal aspects of the 1998 Australian waterfront dispute, in which a major stevedoring operation, the Patrick group of companies, sought to replace its largely unionised workforce with a non-union workforce.

Contents

Facts

The company, Patrick Stevedores applied for special leave to appeal from a decision of the Full Court of the Federal Court of Australia, [1] which itself was an appeal from a decision by Justice Tony North of the Federal Court upon an application for urgent interlocutory relief which had been brought by the Maritime Union of Australia. [2] The notice of motion seeking the interlocutory orders from North J was filed on 6 April 1998, and the litigation went from that original step to a decision of the High Court within a single month.

The orders made by North J sought to unravel a set of arrangements which had been made within the Patrick group of companies, arrangements which were found to give rise to an arguable case that there had been a conspiracy to injure the MUA members in their employment, contrary to the protections of the Workplace Relations Act 1996 . Those orders were upheld on appeal to the Full Court of the Federal Court.

Judgment

The High Court upheld the substance of the orders, but modified them to acknowledge that ultimately it was a question for the administrators of the company whether it resumed trading.

See also

Notes

  1. Patrick Stevedores Operations No 2 Pty Ltd v Maritime Union of Australia [1998] FCA 397 , (1998) 77 FCR 478(23 April 1998), Federal Court (Full Court).
  2. Maritime Union of Australia v Patrick Stevedores Operations No 1 Pty Ltd [1998] FCA 397 , (1998) 77 FCR 456(21 April 1998), Federal Court.

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Dockworker</span> Occupation of loading and unloading ships

A dockworker is a waterfront manual laborer who is involved in loading and unloading ships.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">1998 Australian waterfront dispute</span> Event in Australian industrial relations history

The Australian waterfront dispute of 1998 was an event in Australian industrial relations history, in which the Patrick Corporation undertook a restructuring of their operations for the purpose of dismissing their workforce. The restructuring by Patrick Corporation was later ruled illegal by Australian courts. The dispute involved Patrick Corporation terminating the employment of its workforce and locking out the workers of the workplace after the restructuring had taken place, with many of these workers members of the dominant Maritime Union of Australia. The resulting dismissal and locking out of their unionised workforce was supported and backed by the Australian Liberal/National Coalition Government.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Australian labour law</span> Rights and duties of workers, unions and employers in Australia

Australian labour law sets the rights people, the role of trade unions, and democracy at work, against the duties of employers, across the Commonwealth and in states. Under the Fair Work Act 2009, the Fair Work Commission creates a national minimum wage and oversees National Employment Standards for fair hours, holidays, parental leave and job security. The FWC also creates modern awards that apply to most sectors of work, numbering 150 in 2024, with minimum pay scales, and better rights for overtime, holidays, paid leave, and superannuation for a pension in retirement. Beyond this floor of rights, trade unions and employers often create enterprise bargaining agreements for better wages and conditions in their workplaces. However, in 2024 collective agreements only cover 15% of employees, while 22% of employees are classified as "casual", meaning that they lose many basic protections other workers have.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Fixture (property law)</span> Legal concept; physical property which is permanently attached to real property

A fixture, as a legal concept, means any physical property that is permanently attached (fixed) to real property. Property not affixed to real property is considered chattel property. Fixtures are treated as a part of real property, particularly in the case of a security interest. A classic example of a fixture is a building, which, in the absence of language to the contrary in a contract of sale, is considered part of the land itself and not a separate piece of property. Generally speaking, the test for deciding whether an article is a fixture or a chattel turns on the purpose of attachment. If the purpose was to enhance the land, the article is likely a fixture; if the article was affixed to enhance the use of the chattel itself, the article is likely a chattel.

Patrick Corporation is an Australian seaport operator with operations in Brisbane, Fremantle, Melbourne and Sydney. Formerly listed on the Australian Securities Exchange, it is owned by Brookfield Asset Management and Qube Holdings.

Interlocutory is a legal term which can refer to an order, sentence, decree, or judgment, given in an intermediate stage between the commencement and conclusion of a cause of action, used to provide a temporary or provisional decision on an issue. Thus, an interlocutory order is not final and is not subject to immediate appeal.

Clipsal is an Australian brand of electrical accessories. Their primary factory, once located at Bowden, moved to Gepps Cross, South Australia. Smaller factories in South Australia at Nuriootpa, Strathalbyn, Wingfield, Bayswater and in Victoria have closed and production has moved to Gepps Cross and to offshore locations. From 2000 to 2017, Clipsal was the naming rights sponsor for the Adelaide 500 Supercars race.

Australian administrative law defines the extent of the powers and responsibilities held by administrative agencies of Australian governments. It is basically a common law system, with an increasing statutory overlay that has shifted its focus toward codified judicial review and to tribunals with extensive jurisdiction.

<i>Telstra Corporation Ltd v Desktop Marketing Systems Pty Ltd</i>

Telstra Corporation Ltd v Desktop Marketing Systems Pty Ltd was a 2001–2002 case in the Federal Court of Australia in which Telstra successfully argued that its copyright had been infringed by the reproduction of data from the White and Yellow Pages telephone directories in CD-ROM format.

<i>Commonwealth v Yarmirr</i> Native title claim in Australia

Yarmirr v Northern Territory was an Australian court case, decided in 2001. It was an application for the determination of native title to seas, sea-bed and sub-soil, over an area in the Northern Territory, ultimately determined on appeal to the High Court of Australia.

An interlocutory injunction is a court order to compel or prevent a party from doing certain acts pending the final determination of the case. It is an order made at an interim stage during the trial, and is usually issued to maintain the status quo until judgment can be made.

Anne Davies is a former Washington correspondent for Australian newspapers The Age and The Sydney Morning Herald.

Susan Coralie Kenny AM is a Judge of the Federal Court of Australia, and formerly a Judge of the Supreme Court of Victoria, where she was the first woman to serve on the Court of Appeal.

Norfolk Southern Ry. v. James N. Kirby, Pty Ltd., 543 U.S. 14 (2004), was a United States Supreme Court case that dealt with the extent to which maritime bills of lading cover non-maritime portions of a shipment, together with connected clauses for exclusion of liability.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Waterside Workers' Federation of Australia</span> Former maritime trade union in Australia

The Waterside Workers' Federation of Australia (WWF) was an Australian trade union that existed from 1902 to 1993. After a period of negotiations between other Australian maritime unions, it was federated in 1902 and first federally registered in 1907; its first general president was Billy Hughes.

<i>Commonwealth Bank of Australia v Barker</i> Judgement of the High Court of Australia

Commonwealth Bank of Australia v Barker is a leading Australian judgment of the High Court which unanimously and firmly rejected the proposition that contracts of employment in Australia should contain an implied term of mutual trust and confidence.

<i>Melbourne Steamship Co Ltd v Moorehead</i> Judgement of the High Court of Australia

Melbourne Steamship Co Ltd v Moorehead was the last of a series of cases in which members of a cartel, described as the "Coal Vend" were prosecuted under the Australian Industries Preservation Act. The majority of the High Court held that the investigation power was spent once a prosecution had commenced and that under the Act, a corporation could not be required to answer questions. While the decision was based on the wording of the specific legislation, its ongoing significance is its foundation for the requirement that the government act as a model litigant.

<i>Milpurrurru v Indofurn Pty Ltd</i> Australian court case

Milpurrurru v Indofurn Pty Ltd was one of three Federal Court of Australia judgments in the 1990s involving the use of copyright law in Australia relating to Indigenous cultural and intellectual property (ICIP), the others being Yumbulul v Reserve Bank of Australia (1991) and Bulun Bulun v R & T Textiles (1998), or "T-shirts case".

<i>CFMMEU v Personnel Contracting Pty Ltd</i> 2022 judgment of the High Court of Australia

CFMMEU v Personnel Contracting Pty Ltd [2022] HCA 1 is an Australian labour law case of the High Court of Australia on the employment relationship between an individual who signed a contract for services and a labour hire organisation. The High Court departed from the approach widely taken by lower courts in holding a "multi-factorial" approach to determining an employment relationship. The High Court found that the totality of the circumstances was not always the correct approach for identifying whether an individual was engaged as an employee or independent contractor. Rather, the contents of a contract may instead indicate the relationship. The High Court found the worker at the centre of the dispute between the parties was an employee of the labour hire agency for whom he had worked, rather than an independent contractor. The judgment means worker relationships will be defined by the terms of their contract.

<i>IceTV Pty Ltd v Nine Network Australia Pty Ltd</i> Judgement of the High Court of Australia

IceTV Pty Ltd v Nine Network Australia Pty Ltd is a 2009 decision of the High Court of Australia concerning the application of copyright law to a compilation of television schedules broadcast by the Nine Network and published by IceTV.

References