As I understand it they are not appealing a decision by a Tribunal or Court so leave would not be required. To gain any injunctive relief to restrain the ARU from acting on the outcome of what was essentially private arbitration, they would need to win the arguable question to be tried and balance of convenience tests. Not necessarily easy cases to win.
I knew I would regret speaking.
It's governed by Commercial Arbitration legislation.
The WA provision says
"
34A.Appeals against awards
(1)An appeal lies to the Court on a question of law arising out of an award if —
(a)the parties agree, before the end of the appeal period referred to in subsection (6), that an appeal may be made under this section; and
(b)the Court grants leave.
(2)An appeal under this section may be brought by any of the parties to an arbitration agreement.
(3)The Court must not grant leave unless it is satisfied —
(a)that the determination of the question will substantially affect the rights of one or more of the parties; and
(b)that the question is one which the arbitral tribunal was asked to determine; and
(c)that, on the basis of the findings of fact in the award —
(i)the decision of the tribunal on the question is obviously wrong; or
(ii)the question is one of general public importance and the decision of the tribunal is at least open to serious doubt;
and
(d)that, despite the agreement of the parties to resolve the matter by arbitration, it is just and proper in all the circumstances for the Court to determine the question.
(4)An application for leave to appeal must identify the question of law to be determined and state the grounds on which it is alleged that leave to appeal should be granted.
(5)The Court is to determine an application for leave to appeal without a hearing unless it appears to the Court that a hearing is required.
(6)An appeal may not be made under this section after 3 months have elapsed from the date on which the party making the appeal received the award or, if a request had been made under section 33, from the date on which that request had been disposed of by the arbitral tribunal (in this section referred to as the appeal period).
(7)On the determination of an appeal under this section the Court may by order —
(a)confirm the award; or
(b)vary the award; or
(c)remit the award, together with the Court’s opinion on the question of law which was the subject of the appeal, to the arbitrator for reconsideration or, where a new arbitrator has been appointed, to that arbitrator for consideration; or
(d)set aside the award in whole or in part.
(8)The Court must not exercise its power to set aside an award, in whole or in part, unless it is satisfied that it would be inappropriate to remit the matters in question to the arbitral tribunal for reconsideration.
(9)Where the award is remitted under subsection (7)(c) the arbitrator must, unless the order otherwise directs, make the award within 3 months after the date of the order.
(10)The Court may make any leave which it grants under subsection (3)(c) subject to the applicant complying with any conditions it considers appropriate.
(11)Where the award of an arbitrator is varied on an appeal under this section, the award as varied has effect (except for the purposes of this section) as if it were the award of the arbitrator."
NSW is the same.
You'd get a stay of the award if you have an appeal with the relevant prospects of success, which are considerably more demanding than "a serious triable issue".