Australian Childcare Centres Association v Liquor Hospitality and Miscellaneous Union, Queensland Branch, Union of Employees [2005] ICQ 61 (2005) 180 QGIG 54

[Extract from Queensland Government Industrial Gazette, dated 6 January, 2006, Vol. 181, No. 1, page 54] INDUSTRIAL COURT OF QUEENSLAND Industrial Relations Act 1999 - s. 341(1) - appeal against directions order of the commission Australian Childcare Centres Association AND Liquor Hospitality and Miscellaneous Union, Queensland Branch, Union of Employees (C/2005/92) PRESIDENT HALL 14 December 2005 REPORT ON DECISION (as edited) In giving his decision from the Bench on 9 December 2005, the President stated: "Case No. B2133 of 2003, a matter before a Full Bench of the Queensland Industrial Relations Commission relates to the Childcare Industry Award - State. There are two limbs to the application: one seeks an order pursuant to s. 60 of the Act based on inequity in wage rates; and the other aspect seeks the flow on of decisions issued in other jurisdictions. The first matter, the s. 60 matter, was before the Commission on 15 September 2005. On that day, although no directions were issued and, indeed, there was expressed reference to the need to conduct a directions hearing at some time in the future, days were reserved for the hearing of the s. 60 aspects. Once the issue about the flow-on of the decisions in other jurisdictions arose, there were further proceedings in the Commission. I have been taken to the transcript in some detail. I can see nothing in all of those discussions relating to the flow-on issue to suggest that alternative dates were in view for the hearing of the s. 60 matter. Ultimately, after a conference on 18 November 2005, the Full Bench on 30 November 2005, issued directions which have the effect (in short form) of setting dates in February 2006 or the hearing of both the s. 60 and the flow-on issues. The order was made in circumstances in which the Full Bench had before it a letter from the consultants acting for the now Appellants indicating an inability to participate in a hearing commencing so early, indicating an unwillingness to split the two issues and making plain that it had not occurred to the Appellant that the solution to the issue of splitting was to bring forward the matters relating to the s. 60 application. It seems to me that this is the clearest case of a Commission, which was obliged to act judicially, issuing an order without giving the complaining party an adequate opportunity or (on the facts) any opportunity, to be heard. If the correct test be the test contended for by counsel for the Respondent, viz that the refusal to hear came as a bolt from the blue, I think, that it did. In all those circumstances, I set aside all of the directions issued by the Full Bench in Case No. B2133 of 2003 on 30 November 2005. Given the arguments that arise as to the meaning of the phrase 'Full Bench', I make no further order in this matter. There can be no question as to costs.". Dated 14 December 2005. By the Court, [L.S.] C.R. CHADWICK, Acting Industrial Registrar. Released: 14 December 2005 Appearances: Mr J. Murdoch S.C. instructed by Mr L. Moloney of Livingstones (Australia) for the Appellant. Mr A. Herbert directly instructed for the Respondent. Government Printer, Queensland The State of Queensland 2006. -- 1 of 1 --