Australian Building & Construction Commissioner v the Respondent (No 3)
Citation: [2011] FCA 340
At a glance
- Employees affected
- 5
What happened
The Australian Building and Construction Commissioner brought proceedings against multiple respondents (over 200) alleging unlawful industrial action during October 2008 at the Burrup Peninsula Phase V LNG Expansion Project. Five respondents defaulted by failing to file notices of appearance or defence. The action occurred between 14 and 17-24 October 2008, which was prior to the nominal expiry dates of two collective agreements (AMWU and CFMEU agreements) binding the respondents as employees.
What was decided
By Order 35A of the Federal Court Rules, the court entered default judgment against the five defaulting respondents. Declarations were made that the respondents contravened: s.38 of the Building and Construction Industry Improvement Act 2005 (unlawful industrial action); s.494(1) of the Workplace Relations Act 1996 (action during agreement term); and specific clauses of the collective agreements. Penalties were not determined at this stage but were to be assessed at a penalty hearing.
What it means for employers
Employees taking industrial action that breaches collective agreements or occurs outside permitted procedures can face declaratory orders and penalties. Breach of agreement terms regarding industrial action can be established against unrepresented respondents through default judgment.
What it means for employees
Industrial action must comply with agreed procedures and timing in collective agreements. Taking action outside agreed parameters or prior to agreement expiry can result in declarations of breach and penalties against individuals. Participation in unlawful industrial action exposes workers to personal liability.
Want this applied to your situation?
Reading the decision is free. FairWork Mate goes further — it reads the full case library and applies precedents like this one to your specific facts, citing the cases as it reasons. General information, not a guaranteed outcome or legal advice.
Every statement above is drawn from the published decision. Read the original here:
https://www.judgments.fedcourt.gov.au/judgments/Judgments/fca/single/2011/2011fca0340Want more cases like this?
FairWork Mate tracks Fair Work Ombudsman, Fair Work Commission and Federal Court decisions across Australia. The AI advisor answers plain-English questions grounded on the full corpus — awards cited, industry, penalty amounts and affected employee counts — with a citation to the underlying decision on every answer.
Individual case summaries on this site are free. Full-corpus advisor access is a paid product — Business Solo from $99/mo, 50% off your first 3 months for the first 100 signups.
Get notified on new Fair Work cases
Free email alerts when we publish new underpayment decisions, penalty orders, and workplace law updates.
Free forever. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
This summary was drafted from the published decision and reviewed before publishing. It is general information, not legal advice. For your specific situation, speak to the Fair Work Ombudsman (13 13 94) or a qualified lawyer. About these summaries & corrections →