Federal Court of Australia
Federal Court of Australia
Jamsek v ZG Operations Australia Pty Ltd (No 2) [2020] FCAFC 179 Appeal from: Jamsek v ZG Operations Australia Pty Ltd [2020] FCAFC 119
File number: NSD 495 of 2019
Judgment of: PERRAM, WIGNEY AND ANDERSON JJ
Date of judgment: 23 October 2020
Catchwords: INDUSTRIAL LAW – whether Respondents' defence of appeal 'unreasonable' under s 570(2)(b) Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth)
Legislation: Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) s 570(2)(b)
Cases cited: Jamsek v ZG Operations Australia Pty Ltd [2020] FCAFC 119
Registry: New South Wales
Division: Fair Work Division
National Practice Area: Employment and Industrial Relations
Number of paragraphs: 4
Date of last submissions: 18 September 2020 (First Applicant) 11 September 2020 (Respondents)
Date of hearing: Determined on the papers
Counsel for the Applicants: Ms R Francois with Mr A Crossland and Ms K Hooper
Solicitor for the Applicants: Watson Law
Counsel for the Respondents: Mr S Wood QC with Mr D Ternovski
Solicitor for the Respondents: Agnew Legal
ORDERS NSD 495 of 2019
BETWEEN: MARTIN JAMSEK First Applicant
DANIEL CIVTANOVIC AS TRUSTEE FOR THE BANKRUPT ESTATE OF ROBERT WILLIAM WHITBY Second Applicant
STEPHEN HUNDY AS TRUSTEE FOR THE BANKRUPT ESTATE OF ROBERT WILLIAM WHITBY Third Applicant
AND: ZG OPERATIONS AUSTRALIA PTY LTD ACN 060 142 501 First Respondent
ZG LIGHTING AUSTRALIA PTY LTD ACN 002 281 601 Second Respondent
order made by: PERRAM, WIGNEY AND ANDERSON JJ DATE OF ORDER: 23 OCTOBER 2020
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