Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Community & Public Sector Union v Stellar Call Centres Pty Ltd [2000] FCA 1739
INDUSTRIAL LAW – interlocutory application for reinstatement – alleged breaches of ss 298L(1)(a) and 298M of the Workplace Relations Act 1996 (Cth) Australasian Meat Industry Employees' Union v G & K O'Connor Pty Ltd [2000] FCA 627, distinguished COMMUNITY & PUBLIC SECTOR UNION & ANOR v STELLAR CALL CENTRES PTY LTD N1218 of 2000
MADGWICK J 20 NOVEMBER 2000 SYDNEY
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY N1218 of 2000
BETWEEN: COMMUNITY & PUBLIC SECTOR UNION & ANOR
FIRST APPLICANT
MELINDA MADDOX
SECOND APPLICANT
AND: STELLAR CALL CENTRES PTY LTD
RESPONDENT
JUDGE: MADGWICK
DATE OF ORDER: 20 NOVEMBER 2000
WHERE MADE: SYDNEY
THE COURT ORDERS THAT: 1. The hearing be expedited. 2. The applicants application for reinstatement be refused. 3. The respondent pay to the second applicant, on its usual fortnightly pay days, a sum equal to her average fortnightly earnings from all sources with the respondent over the last six months. 4. The parties have liberty to apply as to order (3).
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY N1218 of 2000
BETWEEN: COMMUNITY & PUBLIC SECTOR UNION & ANOR
FIRST APPLICANT
MELINDA MADDOX
SECOND APPLICANT
AND: STELLAR CALL CENTRES PTY LTD
RESPONDENT
JUDGE: MADGWICK
DATE: 20 NOVEMBER 2000
PLACE: SYDNEY
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT (revised from transcript) HIS HONOUR: 1 The application before the Court is for the imposition of penalties on the respondent, for orders requiring the respondent to reinstate the second applicant and also for ancillary orders. Factual background 2 The claim arises out of the summary dismissal by the respondent of the second applicant, Ms Maddox, on 8 November 2000 and out of alleged unlawful discrimination against her, since April this year, on account of her membership of the first applicant, the Union, and on account of her being at least a de facto "delegate" of the Union, within the meaning of s 298L(1)(a) of the Workplace Relations Act 1996 (Cth) ("the Act"). 3 The evidence shows that the second applicant was employed by the respondent on 25 October 1999, as a customer service agent.
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