Federal Court of Australia
Federal Court of Australia
Kelly v Corporation of the Synod of the Diocese of Brisbane [2023] FCA 829 File number: QUD 241 of 2022
Judgment of: LOGAN J
Date of judgment: 15 May 2023
Catchwords: INDUSTRIAL LAW – where applicants allege breach of contract at common law and contravention of s 351 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) (FWA), prohibition on adverse action based on discrimination grounds – whether the Court has jurisdiction to deal with non-federal aspect of dispute – where the Federal Court has jurisdiction over the whole of a matter once its jurisdiction has been invoked Petrotimor Companhia de Patroleos SARL v Commonwealth of Australia (2003) 128 FCR 507 considered – where the court has jurisdiction to determine whether it has jurisdiction to hear matter Parisienne Basket Shoes Pty Ltd v Whyte (1938) 59 CLR 369 considered – where federal jurisdiction sought to be invoked by a general protections court application under s 370 FWA – where the applicants out of time to file a general protections court application s 370(a)(ii) – where the applicants were advised by solicitor that time limitation did not apply – whether an extension of time should be granted – principles in Brodie-Hanns v MTV Publishing Ltd (1995) 67 IR 298 considered – where extension of time denied, jurisdiction of court not invoked – proceeding dismissed
Legislation: Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) ss 12, 342, 352, 365, 368, 370 Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth) ss 39B, 562 Industrial Relations Act 1988 (Cth) Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) r 34.05 Public Health Act 2005 (Qld) s 362B (since expired)
Cases cited: Brodie-Hanns v MTV Publishing Ltd (1995) 67 IR 298 Citta Hobart Pty Ltd v Cawthorn (2022) 96 ALJR 476 Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union v Corinthian Industries (Australia) Pty Ltd [2014] FCA 239 Owners of "Shin Kobe Maru" v Empire Shipping Co Inc (1994) 181 CLR 404 Parisienne Basket Shoes Pty Ltd v Whyte (1938) 59 CLR 369 Petrotimor Companhia de Petroleos SARL v Commonwealth of Australia (2003) 128 FCR 507 Rizeq v Western Australia (2017) 262 CLR 1
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