Federal Court of Australia
Federal Court of Australia
Metro Tasmania Pty Ltd v Scatchard [2022] FCA 1223 Appeal from: Scatchard v Metro Tasmania Pty Ltd [2022] FedCFamC2G 53
File number(s): TAD 6 of 2022
Judgment of: MCELWAINE J
Date of judgment: 14 October 2022
Catchwords: INDUSTRIAL LAW –Appeal from a decision in the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Division 2) - claim for underpayment pursuant to the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) – operation and interpretation of industrial agreement – whether primary judge erred in reasoning a roster could not be comprised of two documents – appeal allowed
Legislation: Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) s 54 Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) s 25(1AA)
Cases cited: Aldi Foods Pty Ltd v Moroccanoil Israel Ltd (2018) 261 FCR 301; [2018] FCAFC 93 Construction, Forestry, Mining and energy Union v BHP Coal Pty Ltd [2011] FCA 1294 James Cook University v Ridd (2020) 278 FCR 566; [2020] FCAFC 123 Ridd v James Cook University (2021) 95 ALJR 878; [2021] HCA 32 Metro Tasmania Bus Operators Enterprise Agreement 2013 [2013] FWCA 5573 Metro Tasmania Bus Operators Enterprise Agreement 2016 [2015] FWCA 8508
Division: General Division
Registry: Victoria
National Practice Area: Employment and Industrial Relations
Number of paragraphs: 43
Date of hearing: 21 September 2022
Counsel for the Applicant: Ms V Bulut
Solicitor for the Applicant: Seyfarth Shaw Australia
Counsel for the Respondent: Mr R Reitano
Solicitor for the Respondent: Australian Rail, Tram and Bus Industry Union
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