Cahill v CFMEU & Mates
The ABCC’s longest running case has been brought to a close with the High Court of Australia refusing to hear an appeal brought by the CFMEU against previous Federal Court of Australia decisions which gave support to the way the ABCC runs its litigation.
ABC Commissioner Leigh Johns said the case vindicated the ABCC’s approach to pursuing legal action that ensures distinct misconduct is penalised appropriately.
‘On three separate occasions, over seven days, Mr Mates acted unlawfully and it is appropriate that the penalty determined by the court should reflect that.,’ said Commissioner Johns. ‘To suggest that it was one course of conduct trivialised behaviour that has no place in today's workplaces. Union officials don't get to dictate who gets employed.
‘As a responsible litigator, the ABCC is very mindful that the allegations of contraventions that it makes need to be proportionate to the conduct that is alleged, and not be over-stated. Both the Federal Court and now the High Court have given a big tick to how we go about running our litigation.’
The case concerned a Heidelberg building site where work was due to re-commence under a new head contractor. The previous head contractor had gone into voluntary administration.
On 15 and 17 February 2006, CFMEU official Bob Mates threatened the new head contractor saying the project would never recommence if the two former union shop stewards and the OHS officer were not re-employed.
On 21 February 2006 the site’s crane crew shut down and left the site at the direction of Mr Mates. The Federal Court found that Mr Mates’ intention in shutting down the crane operations was to coerce the new head contractor to hire the three former employees.
In September 2009 the Court imposed penalties totalling $75,500 on the CFMEU and $10,000 on Mr Mates for three contraventions of section 43 of the Building and Construction Industry Improvement Act 2005.
The respondents appealed against the decision on penalty, and Justice Kenny’s conclusion that the contraventions arose from more than one course of conduct. On 18 May 2010 the Full Court of the Federal Court dismissed the appeal.
On 17 June 2010 the CFMEU and Mr Mates applied for special leave to appeal the decision of the Full Federal Court of Australia in the High Court of Australia
The High Court today refused the CFMEU and Mr Mates special leave to further appeal this matter.