Australian Building and Construction Commissioner v Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union (The Monash Freeway Widening Case) (No 2)
Citation: [2021] FCA 1101
At a glance
- Penalty
- $54,540
What happened
James Simpson, acting as a representative of the CFMMEU, exercised right of entry at construction sites on the Monash Freeway Widening project in April 2017. On the evening and early morning of 29-30 April 2017 at the Eumemmering Creek Site, Simpson failed to comply with reasonable occupational health and safety requirements, remaining on site despite warnings and refusing multiple requests to leave. On 9 May 2017 at Gate 3 Site, Simpson physically pushed a site manager (Inkster) while exercising or attempting to exercise a right of entry. The union was involved in his conduct.
What was decided
The court found that Simpson contravened section 499 (failing to comply with reasonable OHS requirements) and section 500 (acting improperly while exercising right of entry) of the Fair Work Act on both occasions. The CFMMEU was found liable under section 550 (involvement) and section 793 (attribution of officers' conduct). The court imposed penalties of $7,290 on Simpson and $47,250 on the CFMMEU, reflecting the seriousness of breaching right of entry provisions and the union's history of non-compliance.
What it means for employers
Site managers should ensure reasonable occupational health and safety requirements are clearly communicated and enforced. Right of entry holders must be reminded of their obligations to comply with reasonable site requirements and not engage in physical contact. Multiple violations by union representatives can attract substantial penalties.
What it means for employees
Workers should understand that right of entry holders, while having legitimate access rights, must comply with reasonable site requirements and cannot physically threaten or assault workers or managers.
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/2021/2021fca1101Want 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 →