164 / 262
UNREPORTED IRISH CASES
Court rules against picket by musicians
Mr Justice Kenny in the High Court yesterday ruled
that a number of people were not entitled to picket the
Addison Lodge licensed premises and guest house, at
Botanic Road, Glasnevin, Dublin.
He granted a permanent injunction to the owners of
the premises, Addison Lodge Ltd., restraining picketing
by John Brady, Tony Bannon, Victor Prouse and Peter
Pringle.
When the case was last in Court on May 1, Mr.
Justice Kenny would not grant an injunction against
John Flahive, district secretary, Irish Federation of
Musicians, because he had not taken part in the picket-
ing of the premises.
On that occasion there was the affidavit of James J.
Freyne, a director of the plaintiff company, who re-
ferred to the hiring by the company of musicians for
their cabaret and entertainment each night of the week.
He received a letter from Mr. Flahive demanding that
on each occasion the company required the services of
musicians it should only hire members of the union.
Subsequently the premises were picketed. The picket,
he claimed, was aimed at compelling him to force his
employees, who were not members of the union, to join
the union for only in that way could the company
retain the employees in its employment and comply
with the defendants' demands.
Mr. Justice Kenny granted an interim injunction
and yesterday the company applied for and was
granted an interlocutory injunction. The hearing of
the motion was treated as the hearing of the action.
In an affidavit to the court, Mr. Flahive stated that
the union was trying to ensure that the members would
not be employed along with non-union members. The
difficulties that had arisen concerned a number of
issues; that employment by the company of the union
members, including the defendants, at the premises
under conditions which often compelled them to work
with non-union members contrary to the rules of the
union; he had received numerous complaints from
members of the union working at the premises about
this.
The members would then have to decide whether to
perform, in breach of the rules, or not to perform. The
union members on such occasions preferred not to em-
barrass the plaintiff and the guests.
Mr. Liam Hamilton, S.C., for the plaintiffs, sub-
mitted that the defendants were attempting to force
the plaintiffs to employ only trade-union labour, which
would have the effect of preventing the plaintiffs from
adding non-union labour. The plaintiffs were willing at
all times to employ union labour but they did not want
this to be imposed on them. There was no trade dispute,
and the plaintiffs were entitled to an order restraining
picketing.
Mr. Patrick J. Bourke, S.C., who appeared for the
defendants, said that the union gave notice of their
intention to put on a picket. There were no threats
used, no illegal activities alleged against the defendants
and no request that non-union musicians should join
the union, but that the plaintiffs should readjust their
system to only employ union members. He submitted
that this was a trade dispute.
Mr. Hamilton submitted that there was coercion on
the plaintiffs to secure the dismissal of employees who
were not members of the union.
[Addeson Lodge v. Brady—Kenny J.—unreported—
5 May 1973.]
Suspension of art student is lifted.
The suspension imposed on a student of the National
College of Art has been lifted, and the action brought
in the High Court arising out of the suspension has
been settled.
The terms of settlement were announced to Mr.
Justice Pringle in the High Court late yesterday. They
include a provision for the setting up of a board, pre-
sided over by a member of the Bar, to investigate
specific complaints involving certain of the students.
On Friday last the student, Patrick D. Murphy, of
Chelmsford Road, Ranelagh, Dublin, was granted
liberty to serve short notice of motion for an inter-
locutory injunction restraining the college board from
conducting any assessment or evaluation of the work of
the students in the School of Painting until the validity
of his purported suspension or expulsion from the col-
lege had been determined by the court.
When the case was called yesterday, the parties asked
for time to continue their negotiations and later, when
the court sat, Mr. Justice Pringle was told that the
matter had been settled on the terms set out in a docu-
ment which had been prepared.
In this document it was stated that Mr. Murphy
agreed to accept the conditions of assessment laid down
in the School of Painting. The defendants agreed to
arrange for an assessment of Mr. Murphy's work as a
third year student in the School of Painting to be held
in the week beginning Monday, June 18 next, the
assessors to be Professor John F. Kelly and two external
assessors to be appointed by the college. This assess-
ment is to be based on the third year programme
given to Mr. Murphy in October, 1972, and is to be
based exclusively on the standard of Mr. Murphy's
work.
The document stated that the parties accepted that
there had been a misunderstanding on the part of Mr.
Murphy during the academic year as to the programme
which third year students were to pursue. For that
reason, the defendants, while reserving their right to
insist on Mr. Murphy presenting his work for assess-
ment in accordance with a document presented to him
in March, 1973, would not insist on Mr. Murphy
complying with the specific requirements as to quota
of that document, provided that his work reached a
standard appropriatet o that of a student who had
completed his third year in the School of Painting.
The agreement also provided that the defendants
should notify the Minister for Education that Mr.
Murphy was restored as a student of good standing in
the college, and request that his scholarship be restored
to him and that he be refunded all monies which would
have accrued due to him in the normal course during
the period of his suspension.
The consent was entered into without admission of
liability.
Mr. Donal Barrington, S.C., who with Senator Mary
161