Fair Work Ombudsman v W.X.Z Enterprises Pty Ltd
Case
•
[2018] FCCA 616
•16 March 2018
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Fair Work Ombudsman v W.X.Z Enterprises Pty Ltd [2018] FCCA 616
[2018] FCCA 616
16 March 2018
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The Fair Work Ombudsman brought proceedings against W.X.Z Enterprises Pty Ltd concerning alleged underpayments of an employee, Ms ST Lin, and failures to provide pay slips and keep adequate records. The dispute also involved allegations of accessorial liability against an individual for their involvement in the company's contraventions. The matter was heard in the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia.
The court was required to determine whether W.X.Z Enterprises Pty Ltd had contravened the Fair Work Act 1999 (Cth) and relevant awards by underpaying Ms ST Lin and failing to provide pay slips and maintain records. A key legal issue was whether an alleged accessory could be held liable for the principal's contraventions of a statute, and specifically, whether ignorance of the applicable award's coverage was a defence to such a claim.
The court reasoned that the NSW Div.2B Award, and subsequently the Modern Award's transitional provisions, applied to employees working in or in connection with a retail shop, including those in take-away food shops. The court found that the ordinary time hourly wage due to Ms ST Lin under these instruments was $15.39. Regarding accessorial liability, the court held that ignorance of the statute's application was not a defence to allegations of liability as an accessory to breaches of that statute. However, for accessorial liability concerning award contraventions, the alleged accessory must have known that the relevant award applied to the employee.
The provided text does not detail the final orders or outcome of the case.
The court was required to determine whether W.X.Z Enterprises Pty Ltd had contravened the Fair Work Act 1999 (Cth) and relevant awards by underpaying Ms ST Lin and failing to provide pay slips and maintain records. A key legal issue was whether an alleged accessory could be held liable for the principal's contraventions of a statute, and specifically, whether ignorance of the applicable award's coverage was a defence to such a claim.
The court reasoned that the NSW Div.2B Award, and subsequently the Modern Award's transitional provisions, applied to employees working in or in connection with a retail shop, including those in take-away food shops. The court found that the ordinary time hourly wage due to Ms ST Lin under these instruments was $15.39. Regarding accessorial liability, the court held that ignorance of the statute's application was not a defence to allegations of liability as an accessory to breaches of that statute. However, for accessorial liability concerning award contraventions, the alleged accessory must have known that the relevant award applied to the employee.
The provided text does not detail the final orders or outcome of the case.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Employment Law
-
Statutory Interpretation
Legal Concepts
-
Breach
-
Statutory Construction
-
Penalty
-
Remedies
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Most Recent Citation
Elachi v O'Shea & Jolly Jointly Trading as NRG Legal [2020] FCCA 2706
Cases Cited
6
Statutory Material Cited
0
Ansett Australia Limited (subject to Deed of Company Arrangement) v Australian Licensed Aircraft Engineers' Association
[2003] FCAFC 209
Ansett Australia Limited (subject to Deed of Company Arrangement) v Australian Licensed Aircraft Engineers' Association
[2003] FCAFC 209
Kenoss Contractors Pty Ltd v Warren
[2005] FCA 1175