Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Hamzy v Tricon International Restaurants trading as KFC [2001] FCA 1589
INDUSTRIAL LAW – Termination of employment – Regulation excluding certain casual employees from benefit of termination provisions – Validity – Meaning of "employees engaged on a casual basis for a short period" – Whether, upon its proper construction, regulation excludes casual employees not falling within that category – Whether regulation is supported by statutory provision regarding employees in relation to whom the operation of the termination of employment provisions would cause "substantial problems because of their particular conditions of employment" – Severability of invalid provision.
PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Requirements in respect of questions of law referred to Court by Australian Industrial Relations commission
JURISDICTION – Jurisdiction to make declarations concerning invalidity of Commonwealth regulations. Workplace Relations Act 1996 ss 46, 170CA, 170CC, 412 Workplace Relations Regulations reg 30B Acts Interpretation Act 1901 s 46 Judiciary Act 1903 s 39B(1A) OMAR HAMZY By his tutor HAMZY HAMZY v TRICON INTERNATIONAL RESTAURANTS trading as KFC and MINISTER FOR EMPLOYMENT, WORKPLACE RELATIONS & SMALL BUSINESS N 165 of 2001 WILCOX, MARSHALL and KATZ JJ SYDNEY 16 NOVEMBER 2001
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY N 165 of 2001
BETWEEN: OMAR HAMZY by his tutor HAMZY HAMZY
APPLICANT
AND: TRICON INTERNATIONAL RESTAURANTS trading as KFC
FIRST RESPONDENT
MINISTER FOR EMPLOYMENT, WORKPLACE RELATIONS & SMALL BUSINESS
SECOND RESPONDENT
JUDGES: WILCOX, MARSHALL and KATZ JJ
DATE OF ORDER: 16 NOVEMBER 2001
WHERE MADE: SYDNEY
THE COURT DECLARES THAT: 1. Neither regulation 30B(1)(d) nor regulation 30B(3) of the Workplace Relations Regulations is authorised by s 170CC of the Workplace Relations Act 1996 and both provisions are invalid. AND THE COURT ORDERS THAT: 2. Each of the questions of law referred to the Court by the Australian Industrial Relations Commission on 15 February 2001 be marked: "Inappropriate to answer". Note: Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.
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