Federal Court of Australia
CATCHWORDS
Industrial law - breaches of terms of award - failure to pay wages, annual leave entitlements etcetera - whether employees had become independent contractors.
Penalty - extent to which breaches of one term relating to several employees "arose out of a course of conduct" and therefore shall be treated as constituting a single breach. Amount of underpayments - whether amounts paid in excess of the award in some weeks should be taken into account.
Costs - whether Court empowered to order payment of expenses
of applicant's witnesses.
Conciliation & Arbitration Act 1904 - ss. 116, 119, 120, 197A
Federal Court of Australia Act - s. 43
MICHAEL JAMES LYNCH v BUCKLEY SAWMILLS PTY. LTD.
Nos. V. 4-18 of 1984
CORAM : KEELY J. DATE : 25 OCTOBER, 1984 .:.- PLACE : MELBOURNE
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
VICTORIA DISTRICT REGISTRY ) Nos V. 4-18 of 1984 ) )
INDUSTRIAL DIVISION
BETWEEN
MICHAEL JAMES LYNCH
Applicant AND: BUCKLEY SAWMILLS PTY. LTD. Respondent 25 OCTOBER, 1984 KEELY J.
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
These are fifteen applications seeking the imposition of penalties under s. 119 of the Conciliation and Arbitration Act 1904 (the Act) upon the respondent for alleged breaches of terms of the Timber Industry Consolidated Award 1974 (the award). By consent the applications were heard together. Each application relates to one of four persons alleged to have been employees of the respondent, Messrs. David William Evans, Anthony Thomas Fraser, Robert James Stevenson and Guisseppe Brega. As the respondent has contended that they were not employees at any material time it will be convenient to refer to them as the four workers.
The applications fall into four groups.
In the first group (Nos. V. 4, 5, 6 and 7 of 1984)
each application alleges a failure to pay to one of the four
2. workers "the wages to which he was entitled pursuant to clause 4 of the .. Award ...". The period during which the alleged underpayments occurred was from 27 March, 1983 to 29 July, 1983 except in respect of Guisseppe Brega where the relevant period, as amended without objection, was 22 April, 1983 to 9 September, 1983. It should be added that the parties later agreed, in dealing with an application under s. 119(3), that the relevant period in respect of Mr. Brega was
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