Year: 1957
Type: article
Abstract: THE decision of the House of Lords in Bonsor v. Musicians' Union 'has already been analysed by Professor Lloyd2 and Mr. tho ma^.^The purpose of this note is to add a post-script to their discussion,4 and to investigate further some of the matters which may arise from the case.Briefly, the issue which their Lordships had to decide was whether the plaintiff member, expelled from the union in breach of the rules, could recover damages against the " union " for breach of ont tract.^Bonsor's name had been erased from the lists by the Brighton branch secretary because his subscriptions were fifty-two weeks in arrears 6 ; as the rules stood, only the branch committee could take that decision; and the Court of Appeal' granted, in consequence, a declaration and injunction which were not challenged on appeal.But expulsion from the union (which was "what is known as ' a closed shop'" *) was the equivalent [1956] A.C. 104." Damages for Wrongful Expulsion from a Trade Union " (1956) 19 M.L.R. 121.'' Trade Unions and Their Members " (1956) C.L.J. 67.Accordingly, many of the matters set out fully in their articles are not repeated here.Such was the claim, although it was never pleaded as such; per Lord MacDermott, p. 134.(Compare Abbott v. Sullivan [1952],1 K.B. 189, 196.)I f the Rules had provided for termination of membership tpso facto the case would never have arisen: of.[1954] Ch. 483, Evershed M.R.The subscrip tions were, of course, not recoverable by action: Trade Union,,Act, 1871, 8. 4 (2).It was conceded in the House of Lords ("rightly per Lord MacDermott; Lord Keith agreed), that 8. 4 did not bar the action for damages.The section probably does not stop the member from bringing an action designed to prevent the Union from refusing to receive his subscriptions (80 that it may then expel him for arrears): Brodie v. Bevan (1921) 38 T.L.R. 172, 177.[1954] Ch. 479.Denning L.J. there put forward the novel suggestion that no rule would be enforced which was contrary to what is fair and reason- able ": p. 486.This extension of the rules of public policy to curtail freedom of (so-called) contract, may not be unreasonable; but it is suggested that Mr. Thomas's summary shows how novel this prinEiple would be: op.cit.,
Source: Modern Law Review
Author: K. W. Wedderburn
Institution: University of Cambridge
Language: English
Subfield: Law
Field: Social Sciences
Domain: Social Sciences
Open Access status: bronze
OpenAlex ID: W2009517394