FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA
| LEWIS v SUNNYHAVEN LTD | [2011] FMCA 745 |
| INDUSTRIAL LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Application in a Case – whether the matter is within the accrued or associated jurisdiction of the Court – Application in a Case dismissed. |
| Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) s.570 Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) s.1317H Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) s.32(1) Federal Magistrates Act 1999 ss.3, 14,18 Fair Work (Transitional Provisions and Consequential Amendments) Act 2009 Industrial Relations Act 1996 (NSW) ss. 10, 11, 12, 15, 356, 364, 365, 369, 376 Workplace Relations Amendment (Workchoices) Act 2005 (Cth) Workplace Relations Act 1966 (Cth) s.4, 16, 178, 208(1) Workplace Relations Regulations 2006 reg.2.1.2(2) |
| Applicant: | BRONWEN LEWIS |
| Respondent: | SUNNYHAVEN LTD |
| File Number: | SYG 2017 of 2009 |
| Judgment of: | Lloyd-Jones FM |
| Hearing date: | 2 September 2010 |
| Delivered at: | Sydney |
| Delivered on: | 29 September 2011 |
REPRESENTATION
| Counsel for the Applicant: | E .W. Young |
| Solicitors for the Applicant: | Michelle Walsh of Turner Freeman Lawyers |
| Counsel for the Respondent: | G. Boyce |
ORDERS
The Application in a Case filed 28 July 2010 is dismissed.
Costs reserved.
| FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT SYDNEY |
SYG2017 of 2009
| BRONWEN LEWIS |
Applicant
And
| SUNNYHAVEN LTD |
Respondent
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
Background
This is an Application brought under the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) relating to alleged breaches by the Respondent in relation to the payment of wages to the Applicant. The Applicant was employed by Sunnyhaven Limited (“Sunnyhaven”) as a Direct Support Worker from 18 November 2000 to 6 April 2002 when she was promoted to the position of Team Leader. On 15 January 2005, the title of her position was changed to Unit Coordinator.
The Applicant’s held the position of Unit Coordinator of the Respite Unit which involved working Friday through to Monday on a 38 hour per week roster, with an additional 6 hours of overtime per week on an hourly rate of $19.78 per hour. The Applicant also received penalty rates for overtime and weekend shifts. The Applicant’s employment was covered by the Social & Community Services Employees (NSW) State…
Continue reading Lewis v Sunnyhaven Ltd
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- Lewis v Sunnyhaven Ltd [2011] FMCA 745
- Case
- [2011] FMCA 745
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The legal issues before the court were whether the plaintiff was entitled to the disclosure of certain documents from the defendant and if the defendant had a valid reason to withhold those documents. The court needed to consider the principles of discovery and the extent to which documents could be withheld on the grounds of legal professional privilege and/or confidentiality.
The court found that the plaintiff was not entitled to the disclosure of the documents in question. The reasoning was based on the fact that the documents were protected by legal professional privilege. The court was satisfied that the documents were prepared by legal professionals for the purpose of obtaining legal advice and were not intended for any other purpose. Additionally, the court determined that the documents were confidential and disclosure would potentially harm the defendant's legal rights.
The court dismissed the plaintiff's Application in a Case. Costs were reserved for further consideration.
Orders
Orders of the court
1.
The Application in a Case filed 28 July 2010 is dismissed.
2.
Costs reserved.
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.