Jemena Asset Management (3) Pty Ltd v Coinvest Ltd

HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIAFRENCH CJ,GUMMOW, HEYDON, CRENNAN, KIEFEL AND BELL JJJEMENA ASSET MANAGEMENT (3) PTY LTD & ORS                 APPELLANTSANDCOINVEST LIMITED  RESPONDENTJemena Asset Management (3) Pty Ltd v Coinvest Limited [2011] HCA 337 September 2011M127/2010ORDERAppeal dismissed with costs. On appeal from the Federal Court of AustraliaRepresentationA J Myers QC with C B O'Grady for the appellant (instructed by Herbert Geer)P J Hanks QC with S J Moore for the respondent (instructed by Maddocks)S J Gageler SC, Solicitor-General of the Commonwealth with C P Young intervening on behalf of the Attorney-General of the Commonwealth (instructed by Australian Government Solicitor)Notice:  This copy of the Court's Reasons for Judgment is subject to formal revision prior to publication in the Commonwealth Law Reports.CATCHWORDSJemena Asset Management (3) Pty Ltd v Coinvest LimitedConstitutional law (Cth) – Inconsistency between Commonwealth instrument and State law – Appellants employed construction workers and were bound by certain federal industrial instruments ("federal instruments") made under Workplace Relations Act 1996 (Cth) ("Commonwealth Act"), which contained provisions regarding long service leave – Construction Industry Long Service Leave Act 1997 (Vic) ("State Act") provided for scheme of portable long service leave benefits for workers in construction industry – Commonwealth Act provided for paramountcy of industrial instruments made under federal legislation over State laws, to extent of any inconsistency – Whether State Act inconsistent with Commonwealth Act as embodied in federal instruments.Words and phrases – "alter, impair or detract from", "cover the field", "direct inconsistency", "indirect inconsistency".Constitution, s 109.Construction Industry Long Service Leave Act 1997 (Vic),...