the Applicant v Fair Work Commission
Citation: [2014] FCA 1156
What happened
the Applicant is secretary of the Victoria No 1 Branch of the Health Services Union. the Respondent is an employee and General Manager of the Branch. In July 2014, the Fair Work Commission issued Terms of Inquiry investigating whether the Applicant, the Respondent, and others had made inaccurate declarations when obtaining right of entry permits. The allegation was that the Respondent had completed required training tests on behalf of others who then falsely declared they had completed the training themselves. The inquiry was scheduled to hear evidence beginning 27 October 2014.
What was decided
the Applicant and the Respondent applied for an interlocutory injunction restraining the Commission from proceeding until it ruled on their objection to its jurisdiction. The court granted the injunction, finding the applicants had established a prima facie case that the Commission lacked jurisdiction over permit revocation matters and that the balance of convenience favoured restraining the inquiry. The court noted a duty to determine jurisdiction before proceeding to hear evidence on the merits.
What it means for employers
Union organisations should be aware that right of entry permit holders must genuinely complete required training themselves. Allowing others to take tests on behalf of applicants constitutes false declarations and can result in permit revocation inquiries.
What it means for employees
Right of entry permit holders must ensure they personally complete required training and make honest declarations. Permit revocation can occur if training was not genuinely completed by the applicant.
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/2014/2014fca1156Want 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 →