Chiodo v Silk Contract Logistics [2023] FCA 1047

Federal Court of Australia

Chiodo v Silk Contract Logistics [2023] FCA 1047 File number: NSD 149 of 2021

Judgment of: KENNETT J

Date of judgment: 6 September 2023

Catchwords: EMPLOYMENT – whether truck driver employee or independent contractor – where contract part verbal and part implied – extent of control of respondent over applicant's work – whether applicant was carrying on own business – where applicant benefitted from independent contracting arrangements – application dismissed

Legislation: Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) ss 26(1), 27, 357(1), 570 Superannuation Guarantee (Administration) Act 1992 (Cth) ss 6, 12, 16, 17, 18, 19 Superannuation Guarantee Charge Act 1992 (Cth) Annual Holidays Act 1944 (NSW) s 2 Long Service Leave Act 1955 (NSW) s 3(1)

Cases cited: Bluescope Steel (AIS) Pty Ltd v Australian Workers' Union [2019] FCAFC 84; 270 FCR 359 Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union v Personnel Contracting Pty Ltd [2022] HCA 1; 96 ALJR 89 Fair Work Ombudsman v Quest South Perth Holdings Pty Ltd [2015] FCAFC 37; 228 FCR 346 Fair Work Ombudsman v Quest South Perth Holdings Pty Ltd [2015] HCA 45; 256 CLR 137 Howard v Merdaval Pty Ltd [2020] FCA 43 Jamsek v ZG Operations Australia Pty Ltd (No 3) [2023] FCAFC 48; 323 IR 302 JMC Pty Ltd v Commissioner of Taxation [2022] FCA 750 Raftland Pty Ltd v Commissioner of Taxation [2008] HCA 21; 238 CLR 516 Realestate.com.au Pty Ltd v Hardingham [2022] HCA 39; 406 ALR 678 Roy Morgan Research Pty Ltd v Commissioner of Taxation [2011] HCA 35; 244 CLR 97 Secretary, Attorney-General's Department v O'Dwyer [2022] FCA 1183; 318 IR 216 Stevens v Brodribb Sawmilling Co Pty Ltd (1986) 160 CLR 16 ZG Operations Australia Pty Ltd v Jamsek [2022] HCA 2; 96 ALJR 144