Bice v Bribie Island Golf Club [1992] ICQ 17 (1992) 141 QGIG 66

QUEENSLAND GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL GAZETTE [ I l September. 1992 ()l'FE'\SL".'\D l'\[)l STRl".l. COl Rl l:1d11s1na.1 Pe,·aiir·n· .1."1 19'-'i'--l'J:JI s. '.i.4 - app,icaliclll !er lcaL' lo aprc;'1 R. Hice BrihiL' !,land (iolf (!11!, Jl'STI( E \HJ\ :\IHA'-.. i'RFS!DE'-. l 2~ --\ug.usi 1 ()lJ2 Lean' to .-\prv>al - Dcu,;tl,1 - lnd11str1;!1 Cornn11s,iun - l'CJ\\Tr uf( on1n1i<..;s1on --- St\__'ll(>n .c+ . .:: 1 -- PO\\Cr to \-'ar~ ur \01d Con1r~!l"l\ - Public lntcrc,t - Empl;J\mcnt Rclat1onship- l.ca,c l<' Appcai Disnmscd In g1\ ing his .ludgrncnt from the Bench on 10 -\ugu'il I'!')~. the President ,aid:- '"This 1s an applicatrnn for lea\ c to appeal to a F,111 Bench 1Jf the lndustnal Comrniss1011 in rcspc,·t of a dcc1,ion h\ an lndusln,11 Comm1s,1oncr un a gru!lnd 01hcr than error 01· la,\ or 11a1:t uf jurisdiction. Such ica;c is neit to he gr.1ntcd unlc-,, the Prcs1drnt is of the opinion that tile· matter is of such 1mpllrtancc t1Ja1 an appeal should be brought in the public interest. -1 he matter of which till' [ndu"1ria1 Com1111ss1on,T was ,ci1c'd wa, an appl:cat1on fr,r the c,e'r,·1sc c)I° trc po,.,,,r co1.>fcn,·cl on the (Dn11111,sio11 b, section 4.2 I and I'll ask till' ( ourt Rcportt'rs 10 sc1 0111 sc,·1inn -L:' I (I) m it's cnt1rct, here. •l)i, 1s1on 1 - Spe,il1c Powe, s of Cu;11m1"ion SECTION 4.21 l'O\VER TO V.\R\ UR \'Oll) CO'\rJ.l\CJS -1c 2 I Powrr w ,;ir\ or, uid nn11ra,·ts. Qd.s 12:l-\ ( I J [ran indi, 1d11:Ji who is part\ 10 a l'.Ontract. arrangcmrnL or acc1il:1tcrn! •1rrangeP1l'lll 1claung 10 a comrnc! or arrang.:-mrnt 1, rcquJ1Tdlh,·rd0 \ '.n pnlonn 1t(11k. the lllduqriai Curnmiss1on ma, \an. a!.> ,n1110 or from some other 1inw. the tcrrn, ,rncl eunditwns thc'rcot· 1d,,t111g to tl1l' manner of pc,·fr,nnanc·c or the w,,1k or th,· remuncr;1t]()n 1~,r 1h,' \1(;Jk 1f -- (a) 1hc work \\Ould. bu1 fo1 the conlract. arrang,·ment or coll,111.:ral arran2.cn11.:nL ha Ye hi.:rn pcrf:.>rn1cd b\ that paL \\ a~ an cn1ploycc\ubj('Ll t() an d\\ard 1.Jr i1HJu~tri,,i c1grl'Cl1il':ll~. and tile Comniis,ion is of the oprniun 1ha1 tile contract. arrangement or collateral arranc.cmcnt a \·oicl, or i, dc,1j!.ncd t(~ :-n-oid 1hc r,ru\ isions of an L~"'~-ir<.: or 1ndLstr1al agrc~·1111,.--nL Ol (bi tile \\Olk. being \\Olk not s11hjee1 lo an award ur 1nclustndl agn:en1~n1 or an 2wmd t)fthc .-\ustr:1l1t111 Indu,;,;tna; RL~1auon'- (()111n1is~ion or an i:tf!Xl'CtrL-r:1 c1.:·ni1led b~ that C0!ll1lli',SIOT1 -- (i·1 i\ pcrforn1cd under 1hc cuntra--·L arrangc111L'l11 or cullatcral ,nrangcrncnt b\ the ind1, 1dual a, a11· emplnycc on wage, nr p1ccc·1\ork rates: or (ul in th,· Commi~s1on·, up1nion. taking 1ntu account the rc,pcunc hargainmg p,,s1tions uf the partiL:s to the' cun- 1ract. arrangcmcll1 or collateral arrangement. would. but fur the contract or arrangcmcn1. ha ,c been more appro- viatcl,· ,,,:rforrnecl b, a rc•son a~ :>n cmplrJ\-ce: on 1he' l!round that the contract. arrangement. udlalcral c1nangc- mcnt. o; am term or condnion then.-cit' 1s - • unfair: or • harsh ur uncon'-ic-ionahic. or • aga1mt the puhl1c in1ercs1: • provides, or has pro\ 1dcd. a total 1-cmuncra1;on k~s 1han that which a person pcrfonrnng the 11tnk as an l'mplo;cc \\'OUid h,n ~ rccc1 \·cc!. 11 September. 1992] QUEENSLAND GOVERNMEJ\T INDUSTRIAL GAZETTE 67 1 If the' Industrial Commission 1, ol'thc opinion 1lwt the ,anc:tion the tcrnis and cundit1uns ofa c,rntracL arungcmcm or colla1eral ci 1-r;ui:.>c'lllt'I'.1 u11ckr ,ubs,ction (II would suhsianuall\ atku the ,1 h,>ic' contract arr;rngcn1cnt. or coila1cral arrangcmeni. the Corn- 1n1ss1on 111a, dccl,,rc tlw comract. arrangement. (H cc>llatcral arr«ngcmcm to be \ 01d lwhulh or in pan1 and the declaration tah·s clkct in la1, ac,·on1mgl:, (JI l11 n•itTis,' o:' its po"ns under this section. the Industnal Comm1ss1on may make· such order as to p;n ment of monc, 111 L'di!llC,\i011 \\'ith an\ cc,ntracL arrangcn1cn1 or collateral arrangcn1cn1 , aricd ,,1 dccian:d ,Did (1-1ho!ly r,r in partl as appcars to 1he c·,,i1ir,11,s1011 l\l he JU,t 111 1hc circ11ms1ann's or t~c case. 1.ll P.-occcdings for the ncrcisc of the !nd11s1rial ( omm1ss1,rn's po,1,'r', 11nd,T this s,'cti()n mai he 111su1uted b, the part~ rcquircd b, tile' c,,n1rnc1. arran1;Cllll'tll or cnllatcral arrangcmC'Jll to perform 11ork ur l>\ an Industrial Inspector on behalf of that part\.' ·1 he (omt11!ss1on concluded that 1lic cond;tions prn,idcd for hY claw,c -L'l(b)(ii) had b.:en sat1sti,·d so"' t.ti cngag,, its pnwu tii ,.:1r, :.J1-· terms and comliilons rekrrccl to 1n subsection (I) ,m one o.- (,1!Jcr oi· the basn ,pccihcd in thl· latter part of tile section. In the cours,· ofc,m1111g tu that ccrncl11s1on 1he Commission n'ic'Cted 1hc nol!(l'l lhal 111,· applicant \\aS an crnplo\CC Ill the SCl1Sl' tha1 the tcrrn :s use·d in ,cction 4.2 s11bscction (I). The point of public 1ntn,·s1 \\hirh \\as 1h11s s,ml ln arise was '-'hcther. I put It shorth. gt,11' prnle,sionals arc cmplO)l'C\ in general terms. alld thc1c was ,..,id,.,1,-c ll1 support of the application as 1U the number of golf profcss1011ah a11d 111 respect of certain 1no'-//IU1W eunlracts a11d as w other rna!ler<,. Hu1 the dillirnll\ abou1 all tha1 is tha1 as the Commiss1oncr found. and 1h,· linding \\as plainl\ opc·n on tlw e,1dence to which atten1ion ha\ hcL'll dircc1,·d ,1nd to v. h1ch I ha, c had rc~md. that there w:1, :1. 1f (lilt' c·an pnt rt ,hnrth. u111uue contract~al situat10n in this 1.:is,· ;1ncl that 1ha1 iniualli- at lc;1s1 rctlectccl the arrangement. In otlwr 11ords 1hc foct tha1 there was a unique contractual arrangc- rnc11l ··l'fke·1cd the desire nf buth the applicant. nnd the respondent. Thne 1s J1othi11g 111 the cirrnmstanccs of the arrangement as it was found ill the ( ommiss1011cr to suggest that there was am conner• 11011 hcl\\Ce'n 1h,· posi1ion of golf prufcss1onals in gcncrnl and thl' p( 1 siwin ,)I' 'he apriiic·;;nt 1n JX!r!lcular ln render the interest of 1hc appl1c,1111 and the ou1con1L' of tltcsc proceedings something which 11ould rcsoh c 1lw position 111 rnpcct of golf professionals Ill gennal. ~u1i11~1g, ~:~ l l1a\·c '.-i~1ici_ ha-., lK·l·n dnt\\ll to n1y dtlcntion. LH- nothing tll;11 I ha,,· SL'Cli sms that lhl· Corn1111ss1(H1Cr's conclusion was 1101 olhn than oprn 011 the e1rcumstances. It has been cri11ciscd in :-.nnlt' ;·c:-,ntYl\ and that lead~ !711...' lo Sa\ thi~"" that it ~ccn1s to n1c iD be 1,ot.Lo :h,· j)Din'. that rh,· r omm1ssioncr rcj('ctcd those aspens of Se'l'tion 4.'.I 11hwh depended on ,lll cmplo,im'nt rTla11onship ·\Ik: all. \\:Ja: th•: ,lppli,·;mt was scekrng from the Commission 11c1, tn l>:.1\ e the cpn;racl re\ icwed in t,rm, of the ,ubseetion. The (onrn11's\1uner dc1ern111wd thc1t th,·re wa, an cnlitlemcnl to do th:,l and 111 tlw course of dorng so rcjceled the cmplmcc basis a, being ,1111•0\:lt..'. '\oth11:g has bc,·n said Iu 1no1c:nc- that 111 the circum- :,tann'., ,,r :h,' Gl\C the outnimc 1,,)U[d ll,nc t,ccn an, diffcren1 l1ad tit, ( 1imn11ss1onn decided that the proceeding, \;ere \IJ [,c dealt "1th on the basis 1hat 1h,' applicJnt "·as an cmplo~·l'c. l11 "Thcr '"Y'lh. 111 terms of the 011tcome of 1hc proceedings. wkit 1, said h1 be· the public :n•ercst po111t i, academic. It, dctcrrn111at1on 1s neither here nor there so i'a1· JS b,·i1rn. necc,sar, to sus\3111 the· 1 lJl1ll71issiu:i,·r's conc!us1on that the pcl\~crs C(,n/t:1Ted h1 the s11h- \LYtion had bi..·~·11 i.:ngagcd. • _1 lwrc se,:m, to me to Ix other factors whi,·h weigh against this ,1 c1nf! .i c;1sc \\here it can be said to apposite to grant lca,c in ,_cTn:s ,J1 the· kgislalion. rhe ljlll'Sl!OIL ':\ en as,uming il 1u be Oj)('l1 t,,r 11 I<> lw agitated lwlore a full Bench of th,· Comrn1"ic,n. of 1' lw111,r tlw ,11rangcmc·nl bc1wcen the applicant and the rc,pondcnt ·.1as a rnntr;;1·t uf emplo:menl or somc1hing else. csscntiall\ depends cl:, I !w appl 1ca11011 of pn n, 1ples of law to the factual c1rcurn'>ta11ccs cif thi: part'.cular case·. I !i,1,c alr,·a,h said th;H rc!C\an1h ,hose here arc unique 10 this L,hc and ha\c no general application. But in am c,·cnl. in 1hat. ,•nd ,n a numb,·r of ,Jthcr 1Tspc:·C1s sought to bt' n11sed by th,· gruumh ol app,•al. wnat the' applicant "ould seek to :ig,tall' bdorc ;1 f- ull lkneh of the Com1111ss1nn arc cla,s1calh alleged nrors of a" 01 ,1a11 1 of _1unsd1c11on rather 1han ,omcthmg foundrng a :·n 1,·" o: the pruceedings un the merit'>. In otlw1 \\Oreb. the polllt lhdt IS said to be the public in1crcst P" 11 ;1 1, a pD111t ,'111,h 1s pcrnl1arh rcs1r1e1ccl to the circumstances of tn.:i cas1.., ]1;;:i"i nu 'Aider in1μlica~iun~. doc~ 1101 sc-cn1 tci 1-nc to r;usc matt.:rs which arc appllS!lc t,J .1 general merit, rn JC\\ ,Jr the' lmd "Ii iL:11 1s sought and which arc in an, en·nt. rn a , c·r, largl' pan at least. more apposllely dcscnbccl as mat1crs ot ,·rrllr or Ja,1 or C\cessivc Jmiscl1c1ion. In 1he Cl!'cumstancc, lhcrl'forc ll ~,'cr~1s tu me that, a, I lw,e said. this i; not a c;isc for £:rant uf lea\c to arpcal to a Full Rench of the Commission an~! I dismiss the applicalion.". Da1ed this 1wcn1, c1gh1h da of .\ugust. I 9'l2. ll\ lhe Court. j(S] \LI. C.".LUS Industrial Registrar Mr M. Treherne on behalf of Mr CR. B1c,· Ms D. Linnanr (1nqrmll:d b, Kc\in '\kS\l('e"lc, and Co.l lri1· Bribic Island Ciolt Club. Operatin· Date: \J le\ Judgnwnt - CR. Bice and Brih1c Island Coif Club -- 1 of 1 --