John Mamur v Coles Group Supply Chain Pty Ltd
Case
•
[2020] FWCFB 4954
•15 SEPTEMBER 2020
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
John Mamur v Coles Group Supply Chain Pty Ltd [2020] FWCFB 4954
[2020] FWCFB 4954
15 SEPTEMBER 2020
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The case of John Mamur against Coles Group Supply Chain Pty Ltd involved an appeal against the decision of Deputy President Boyce of the Federal Circuit Court, rendered on 28 July 2020, in the matter number C2020/972. The applicant sought an extension of time to file an application under Section 365 of the Fair Work Act. The primary dispute centred around the refusal by the respondent to grant the applicant an extension of time to lodge the application, a decision which the applicant contested.
The legal issues before the court were whether the application for an extension of time was made within a reasonable time and whether the extension should be granted in light of the circumstances presented by the applicant. The court had to consider the principles governing the extension of time in the context of the Fair Work Act, including the factors that could justify a delay in filing an application.
In its reasoning, the court examined the evidence provided by the applicant and the arguments presented regarding the delay. The court found that the applicant had not provided sufficient justification for the delay in filing the application and that the extension was not warranted under the circumstances. The court noted that the application for an extension was not made within a reasonable time and that there was no exceptional circumstance that would warrant the granting of an extension. As a result, the court dismissed the application for an extension of time and refused permission to appeal the earlier decision.
The final orders of the court were that the appeal against the decision [2020] FWC 3885 of Deputy President Boyce was dismissed, and permission to appeal was refused. The applicant was also ordered to pay the respondent’s costs of the appeal.
The legal issues before the court were whether the application for an extension of time was made within a reasonable time and whether the extension should be granted in light of the circumstances presented by the applicant. The court had to consider the principles governing the extension of time in the context of the Fair Work Act, including the factors that could justify a delay in filing an application.
In its reasoning, the court examined the evidence provided by the applicant and the arguments presented regarding the delay. The court found that the applicant had not provided sufficient justification for the delay in filing the application and that the extension was not warranted under the circumstances. The court noted that the application for an extension was not made within a reasonable time and that there was no exceptional circumstance that would warrant the granting of an extension. As a result, the court dismissed the application for an extension of time and refused permission to appeal the earlier decision.
The final orders of the court were that the appeal against the decision [2020] FWC 3885 of Deputy President Boyce was dismissed, and permission to appeal was refused. The applicant was also ordered to pay the respondent’s costs of the appeal.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Administrative Law
Legal Concepts
-
Appeal
-
Jurisdiction
-
Limitation Periods
-
Refusal to Grant Relief
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Most Recent Citation
Mr Willem Vogrin v Collins Transport Group Pty Ltd [2025] FWC 196
Cases Citing This Decision
106
Ms Lucy Calvert v
[2025] FWC 878
Mr Willem Vogrin v Collins Transport Group Pty Ltd
[2025] FWC 196
Mr Han Yang v Raystech Group Pty Ltd
[2024] FWC 3235
Cases Cited
10
Statutory Material Cited
0
John Mamur v Coles Group Supply Chain Pty Ltd
[2020] FWC 3885
Lombardo v Commonwealth of Australia as represented by the Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations
[2014] FWCFB 2288
Halls v McCardle and Ors
[2014] FCCA 316