Barnett v Territory Insurance Office

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Barnett v Territory Insurance Office [2011] FCA 968

Citation:		Barnett v Territory Insurance Office [2011] FCA 968
Parties:		PHILIP BARNETT v TERRITORY INSURANCE OFFICE
File number:		VID 1045 of 2010
Judge:		MANSFIELD J
Date of judgment:		24 August 2011
Catchwords:		INDUSTRIAL LAW – workplace right – contract of employment – whether a contract of employment is a workplace instrument for purposes of s 341(1) of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth)
Legislation:		Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) Workplace Relations Act 1996 (Cth) Fair Work (Transitional Provisions and Consequential Amendments Act) 2009 (Cth) Industrial Arbitration Act 1912 (WA) Industrial Relations Act 1988 (Cth) Workplace Relations and Other Legislative Amendments Act 1996 (Cth) Fair Work Bill 2008 (Cth) Acts Interpretation Act 1901 (Cth)
Cases cited:		Jones v Queensland Tertiary Admissions Centre Ltd (No 2) (2010) 186 FCR 22 considered Australian Licensed Aircraft Engineers Association v International Aviations Service Assistance Pty Ltd [2011] FCA 333 considered Amalgamated Collieries of WA Ltd v True (1938) 59 CLR 417 cited Byrne v Australian Airlines Ltd (1995) 185 CLR 410 cited R v Gough;Ex parte Meat and Allied Trades Federation of Australia (1969) 122 CLR 237 cited Wheeler v Phillip Morris Ltd (1989) 97 ALR 282 cited Greater Dandenong City Council v Australian Municipal, Clerical and Services Union (2001) 111 IR 121 cited
Date of hearing:	3 August 2011
Place:	Adelaide
Division:	FAIR WORK DIVISION
Category:	Catchwords
Number of paragraphs:	44
Counsel for the Applicant:	A Foster
Solicitor for the Applicant:	Foster Nicholson Legal
Counsel for the Respondent:	T Stanley QC and T Martin
Solicitor for the Respondent:	Minter Ellison

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NORTHERN TERRITORY DISTRICT REGISTRY
FAIR WORK DIVISION	VID 1045 of 2010

BETWEEN:	PHILIP BARNETT Applicant
AND:	TERRITORY INSURANCE OFFICE Respondent

JUDGE:	MANSFIELD J
DATE OF ORDER:	24 AUGUST 2011
WHERE MADE:	ADELAIDE

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1.The application be dismissed.

Note:Entry of orders is dealt with in Rule 39.32 of the Federal Court Rules 2011.

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NORTHERN TERRITORY DISTRICT REGISTRY
FAIR WORK DIVISION	VID 1045 of 2010

BETWEEN:	PHILIP BARNETT Applicant
AND:	TERRITORY INSURANCE OFFICE Respondent

JUDGE:	MANSFIELD J
DATE:	24 AUGUST 2011
PLACE:	ADELAIDE

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1. At present this proceeding involves a short question of law. It is whether the applicant’s contract of employment with the respondent is a workplace instrument for the purposes of s 341(1) of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) (FW Act).

2. That question is to be determined separately from, and before, other questions in the proceeding. 

3. If the contract is not a “workplace instrument” for the purposes of s 341(1) of the FW Act, then it is agreed that the application cannot succeed and must be dismissed. That is because, in the particular circumstances, the applicant has no other cause of action against the respondent in respect of the termination of his employment. He has no cause of action for unfair dismissal under s 382 of the FW Act because his contract of…