FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Warrell v Fair Work Australia (No 2) [2013] FCA 402
Citation: Warrell v Fair Work Australia (No 2) [2013] FCA 402 Parties: EDWARD GEORGE WARRELL v FAIR WORK AUSTRALIA and BACTO LABORATORIES PTY LTD File number: NSD 1820 of 2012 Judge: FLICK J Date of judgment: 3 May 2013 Catchwords: PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – identification of decision-maker – statutory authority – order for substitution Legislation cited: Federal Court Rules 2011 rr 9.05, 9.07, 9.08 Cases cited: Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union v Hamberger [2011] FCA 719
Deva v University of Western Sydney [2011] FCA 199
NAZY v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs [2005] FCA 744
SAAPv Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs (2005) 228 CLR 294
Sneddon v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs [2005] FCAFC 170, 88 ALD 84
SZAQL v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs [2005] FCA 759
VAAD v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs [2005] FCAFC 117
Warrell v Walton [2013] FCA 291Date of hearing: Heard on the papers Place: Sydney Division: FAIR WORK DIVISION Category: Catchwords Number of paragraphs: 5 Counsel for the Applicant: Mr Ian Neil SC with Mr C Bolger Solicitor for the Applicant: Clayton Utz Counsel for the First Respondent: The First Respondent submitted save as to costs Counsel for the Second Respondent: The Second Respondent submitted to any order of the Court
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY
FAIR WORK DIVISION
NSD 1820 of 2012
BETWEEN: EDWARD GEORGE WARRELL
ApplicantAND: FAIR WORK AUSTRALIA
First RespondentBACTO LABORATORIES PTY LTD
Second Respondent
JUDGE:
FLICK J
DATE OF ORDER:
3 MAY 2013
WHERE MADE:
SYDNEY
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1.The name of the First Respondent be amended to “Fair Work Australia”.
2.An order in the nature of certiorari be granted quashing the orders and decision of the First Respondent made on 5 June 2012 in matter C2011/5891 (the “Decision”).
3.A declaration be made that the Decision was not a valid exercise of the powers of the First Respondent and the Decision is a nullity.
4.An order in the nature of mandamus be granted directing the Full Bench of the First Respondent to:
(i)grant the Applicant leave to appeal in proceedings C2011/5891 being the Appeal to the Full Bench of Fair Work Australia in Edward Warrell v Bacto Laboratories Pty Ltd;
(ii)uphold the appeal in proceedings C2011/5891 being the appeal to the Full Bench of Fair Work Australia in Edward Warrell v Bacto Laboratories Pty Ltd;
(iii)remit the proceedings U2011/9217, being the application by Edward Warrell to Fair Work Australia for an unfair dismissal remedy against Bacto Laboratories Pty Ltd, for rehearing by a different member of Fair Work Australia (now the Fair Work Commission).
Note: Entry of orders is dealt with in Rule 39.32 of the Federal Court Rules 2011.
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY
FAIR WORK DIVISION
NSD 1820…
Continue reading Warrell v Fair Work Australia (No 2)
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- Warrell v Fair Work Australia (No 2) [2013] FCA 402
- Case
- [2013] FCA 402
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The court held that the proper respondent in cases involving statutory authorities is the authority itself, rather than the individual members who exercise its powers. This principle was supported by previous cases such as Deva v University of Western Sydney and Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union v Hamberger, which emphasised that the statutory authority, not its members, is the appropriate party to be named in legal proceedings. The court found that Fair Work Australia should have been the respondent in this case. The court granted the application to substitute Fair Work Australia as the first respondent and quashed the original decision made by the individual members of Fair Work Australia. The court further directed the Full Bench of Fair Work Australia to grant leave to appeal, uphold the appeal, and remit the unfair dismissal proceedings for rehearing by a different member of Fair Work Australia.
The final orders of the court were that the name of the first respondent be amended to "Fair Work Australia", the orders and decision made by Fair Work Australia on 5 June 2012 be quashed, a declaration be made that the decision was not a valid exercise of the powers of Fair Work Australia and is a nullity, and an order in the nature of mandamus be granted directing the Full Bench of Fair Work Australia to grant leave to appeal, uphold the appeal, and remit the unfair dismissal proceedings for rehearing by a different member of Fair Work Australia.
Orders
Orders of the court
Full text does not contain this section.
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.