Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Altintas v O'Dea Lawyers [2018] FCAFC 165 File number: SAD 347 of 2017
Judges: WHITE, PERRY AND CHARLESWORTH JJ
Date of judgment: 27 September 2018
Catchwords: INDUSTRIAL LAW – question reserved by the South Australian Employment Tribunal (SAET) – the question concerns SAET's jurisdiction to hear and determine an appeal from an Industrial Magistrate exercising jurisdiction under the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) – whether the Federal Court has jurisdiction under s 26 of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) to hear and determine the question – whether an appeal would lie to this Court from an appellate decision of the SAET in the subject action – whether s 69(13) of the Statutes Amendment (South Australian Employment Tribunal) Act 2016 (SA) vested the SAET with jurisdiction to hear the Appellant's appeal. Held: SAET does not have jurisdiction to determine the Appellant's appeal – accordingly, an appeal would not lie from the SAET decision to this Court and this Court does not have jurisdiction to hear and determine the reserved question.
Legislation: Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) ss 12, 539, 545, 546, 565 Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) s 26 Fair Work Regulations 2009 (Cth) reg 1.05 Fair Work Act 1994 (SA) s 69 Industrial and Employee Relations Act 1994 (SA) Industrial Relations Act 1972 (SA) Return to Work Act 2014 (SA) South Australian Employment Tribunal Act 2014 (SA) Statutes Amendment (South Australian Employment Tribunal) Act 2016 (SA) ss 4, 5, 6-6B, 69
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate