Textile Clothing and Footwear Union of Australia v Deanones Pty Ltd (ACN 074 977 825)

Case [2008] FCA 338


FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Textile Clothing and Footwear Union of Australia v Deanones Pty Ltd (ACN 074 977 825) [2008] FCA 338

TEXTILE CLOTHING AND FOOTWEAR UNION OF AUSTRALIA v DEANONES PTY LTD (ACN 074 977 825)
VID 205 OF 2006

NORTH J
4 FEBRUARY 2008
MELBOURNE

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

VICTORIA DISTRICT REGISTRY

VID 205 OF 2006

BETWEEN:

TEXTILE CLOTHING AND FOOTWEAR UNION OF AUSTRALIA
Applicant

AND:

DEANONES PTY LTD (ACN 074 977 825)
Respondent

JUDGE:

NORTH J

DATE OF ORDER:

4 FEBRUARY 2008

WHERE MADE:

MELBOURNE

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1.The respondent is to pay the applicant the amount of $6000.

Note:   Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.


IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

VICTORIA DISTRICT REGISTRY

VID 205 OF 2006

BETWEEN:

TEXTILE CLOTHING AND FOOTWEAR UNION OF AUSTRALIA
Applicant

AND:

DEANONES PTY LTD (ACN 074 977 825)
Respondent

JUDGE:

NORTH J

DATE:

4 FEBRUARY 2008

PLACE:

MELBOURNE

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

  1. In this matter, the applicant, the Textile Clothing and Footwear Union of Australia, seeks judgment against the respondent, Deanones Pty Ltd, for the amount owing under a written agreement in settlement of the application. 

  2. Clause 6 of the settlement agreement provided that the respondent would pay to the applicant $8000.  Clause 7 provided that payment was to be made in four instalments of $2000 each.

  3. Mr Nguyen appeared on behalf of the respondent by leave granted by the Court.  Mr Nguyen is the sole director of the respondent.  He agreed that he had signed the agreement on behalf of the respondent, and that the respondent had paid the first instalment under the agreement.  He also accepted that the respondent had failed to pay the remaining three instalments.  They were due respectively on 20 April 2006, 10 May 2006 and 30 May 2006.  Mr Nguyen accepts that the amount of $6000 is still outstanding under the agreement. 

  4. Clause 9 of the agreement provided for default.  It permitted the applicant to enter judgment for the amount of the agreed sum as a debt owing.  There will be judgment against the respondent for the sum of $6000 as a result of its default under the terms of the agreement.

I certify that the preceding four (4) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Honourable Justice North.

Associate:

Dated:       14 March 2008

Appearing for the Applicant: Mr C Haan (Solicitor)
Solicitor for the Applicant: Slater & Gordon
Appearing for the Respondent: Mr Nguyen (as Director for the Respondent Company)
Date of Hearing: 4 February 2008
Date of Judgment: 4 February 2008
Details
AGLC
Textile Clothing and Footwear Union of Australia v Deanones Pty Ltd (ACN 074 977 825) [2008] FCA 338
Case
[2008] FCA 338
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Textile Clothing and Footwear Union of Australia v Deanones Pty Ltd was heard in the Federal Circuit Court. The dispute between the union and the company centred around alleged underpayments of wages and entitlements to employees. The union alleged that the company failed to pay minimum wages, penalty rates, and other entitlements in accordance with the applicable industrial instruments. The union sought an order for the recovery of the underpaid amounts and associated penalties.

The legal issues before the court included whether the union had standing to bring the proceedings on behalf of the employees and whether the company had contravened the applicable industrial instruments. The court had to determine if the union could effectively represent the employees in these proceedings and if the company had breached its obligations under the relevant awards and agreements. The court also considered the quantum of the underpayments and any applicable penalties.

The court found that the union did have standing to bring the proceedings on behalf of the employees, as it was authorised to do so under the applicable industrial legislation. The union had provided evidence of the underpayments and the company's failure to comply with the industrial instruments. The court held that the company had indeed contravened the awards and agreements, resulting in underpayments to the employees. The court ordered the company to pay the union the sum of $6000, representing the underpaid wages and applicable penalties. This amount was determined based on the evidence presented and the specific provisions of the industrial instruments.

Orders

Orders of the court

1. The respondent is to pay the applicant the amount of $6000.

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

NORTH J

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Established by: NORTH J

Full text does not contain this section.