The Gazette 1967/71

Hague few scholarships to cover tuition and accommodation expenses are awarded. IRISH SOCIETY OF LABOUR LAW AND SOCIAL LEGISLATION Several members of the Council attended a meeting of the Society which was held in the Clarence Hotel, Dublin, on llth January. Mr. J. B. McCartney, Lecturer in Labour Law, Queen's University, Belfast, deputised at short notice for Mr. J. P. Casey, Lecturer in Law, Aberdeen University, who was to have spoken on The use of the Injunction in Industrial Disputes in Ireland. Mr. Bre.ndan A. McGrath presided. Mr. McCartney, having dealt with the con ditions necessary to grant an injunction, emphas ised that in the usual ex parte application by an employer, the defendant did not get notice of the facts contained in the affidavit, and could not challenge them; furthermore the legal rules per. taining to injunctions often get scant attention from the Judges, who are often anti-Trade Union. The Trade Disputes Act 1906 contained many uncertainties, and in one way or another all strikes could be strictly unlawful. The injunction in trade disputes, although in theory discretionary, appears to be granted more often than not in Ireland, although it should not issue if damages are an adequate remedy to employers. While 37 injunctions, in trade disputes were granted between 1958 and 1967, no less than 20 such injunctions appear to have been granted in 1969. In Britain on account of the draconian provisions of the Trade Disputes Act 1927, which was only repealed in 1946, there had not be.en much opportunity for the Courts to interfere in trade disputes, with the result that all the important decisions on trade disputes between 1927 and 1946 were, Irish decisions. The Courts here got an opportunity to examine the 1906 Act, which Grunfield and the modern Citrine recognise. While the Courts are cognisant that the balance of convenience is in favour of granting the injunction, since Educational Co. v. Fitzpatrick, - (1961) I.R. 345 this appears to be readily shown in favour of the employer. In judeing whether irreparable injury is done to the interests before 15th June, 1970. Very

concerned, little use appears to have been made of Trade Union convenience. As injunctions in a trade disputes may often lead to strikes, it would seem to bring the law into disrepute and con sequently the ready access of employers to the Courts has not produced better industrial relations. This was shown when the legislation prohibiting strikes in electricity works proved abortive and had eventually to be repealed. Mr. McCartney examined briefly the history of labour relations in the United States, in which ultimately an injunction is only granted at the suit of the Labour Relations Court of each State; this invites an open hearing, and cross examination of witnesses. He suggested that the larger trade unions should get up legal departments which would protect more effectively the interest of members; in the event of legal difficulties, a private member's bill should be introduced. It was essential however to remove the ambit of these disputes from the ordinary Courts to a specially constituted Labour Court, with an eminent lawyer as Chairman. There should also be an appelate division with full powers. In regard to Article 40 (6) of the Constitution it was essential to follow the con ventions of the International Labour Office as regards negotiation, and the present partial legislation in favour of employers in regard to unjust dismissals should be amended. In order to avoid damaging strikes, it was necessary to set up a Rights Commissioner to investigate and report upon grievances in labour disputes. It is interesting to note that, from the point of view of international statistics, one big strike can put Ireland to the bottom of the, table. It was also apparent that so many Trade Union agreements were so nebulous that they would be deemed void for uncertainty. There was a vital need for the Universities in the Republic to carry out a detailed survey of the use of the injunction in trade disputes here, and to suggest appropriate remedial legislation to replace the 1906 Act. In answer to questions, the lecturer said: — (1) That practically all injunctions granted in these cases were interim injunctions or interlocutory injunctions. (2) There were some dangers in applying com parative labour law to conditions here, 93