Australian Building and Construction Commissioner v Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union (The Parliament Square Case) (No 2)
Citation: [2018] FCA 1201
At a glance
- Penalty
- $170,000
What happened
Richard Hassett, an elected delegate of the CFMEU, exercised rights of entry under the Fair Work Act at the Parliament Square construction project in Hobart on three separate occasions in 2015. On 28 July 2015, he entered without giving the required notice, held discussions with workers outside meal breaks, and used foul language. On 21 October 2015, he again entered without notice, held discussions outside break times, and ignored instructions to leave. On 5 November 2015, he entered without notice twice, failed to produce his entry notice when requested, refused to leave when asked, used offensive language, and directed abuse at site management.
What was decided
The Federal Court found that Hassett contravened section 500 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) on four occasions by acting improperly while exercising rights of entry. He failed to provide the required notice, entered on days not specified in notice, held discussions outside authorized times, and used offensive language. The CFMEU was held derivatively liable under sections 550 and 793 of the FWA. Penalties imposed were $5,000-$6,000 on Hassett per occasion and $45,000-$50,000 on the CFMEU per occasion, totalling penalties to Hassett of $17,500 and to the CFMEU of $170,000.
What it means for employers
Union officials exercising rights of entry must strictly comply with statutory requirements including providing notice, producing permits, and respecting timing restrictions. Non-compliance with these procedural requirements can result in substantial penalties.
What it means for employees
While union officials have rights to enter worksites and communicate with members, these rights are subject to strict statutory conditions. Officials must follow proper procedures, including providing notice and limiting discussions to authorized times.
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/2018/2018fca1201Want 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 →