<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Jeffrey Phillips SC &#187; Legal &#8211; Case Notes</title>
	<atom:link href="https://jeffreyphillipssc.com.au/category/legal/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://jeffreyphillipssc.com.au</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 31 Mar 2025 12:42:40 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-US</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Evidence in the Fair Work and Employment Law Context</title>
		<link>https://jeffreyphillipssc.com.au/evidence-in-the-fair-work-and-employment-law-context/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=evidence-in-the-fair-work-and-employment-law-context</link>
		<comments>https://jeffreyphillipssc.com.au/evidence-in-the-fair-work-and-employment-law-context/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 03 Jul 2024 04:46:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Jeffrey Phillips SC</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Conference Papers]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Legal - Case Notes]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://jeffreyphillipssc.com.au/?p=1408</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Evidence in the Fair Work and Employment Law Context]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>https://jeffreyphillipssc.com.au/evidence-in-the-fair-work-and-employment-law-context/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Moffet v Dental Corporation &#8211; Case Note by Wazeem Kadir</title>
		<link>https://jeffreyphillipssc.com.au/moffet-v-dental?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=moffet-v-dental-corporation-case-note-by-wazeem-kadir</link>
		<comments>https://jeffreyphillipssc.com.au/moffet-v-dental#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 13 Jul 2019 07:25:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Jeffrey Phillips SC</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Legal - Case Notes]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://jeffreyphillipssc.com.au/?p=1189</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[This case concerns an applicant, Dr David Moffet, a registered dentist whom operated a dental practice in Parramatta between 1987 and 2007. The respondent, Dental Corporation Pty Ltd, bought that dental practice and executed agreements with the applicant that were:]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>https://jeffreyphillipssc.com.au/moffet-v-dental/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>PAPER TIGER: Informax International v Clarius Group</title>
		<link>https://jeffreyphillipssc.com.au/paper-tiger-informax-international-v-clarius-group/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=paper-tiger-informax-international-v-clarius-group</link>
		<comments>https://jeffreyphillipssc.com.au/paper-tiger-informax-international-v-clarius-group/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 07 Mar 2012 03:22:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Jeffrey Phillips SC</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Legal - Case Notes]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://jeffreyphillipssc.com.au/?p=743</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[This piece is taken from <a title="Workplace Review Journal" href="http://www.thomsonreuters.com.au/catalogue/ProductDetails.asp?id=11138" target="_blank">Workplace Review Summer 2011</a>. Available from <a title="Thompson Reuters" href="http://www.thomsonreuters.com.au/" target="_blank">Thompson Reuters</a>.

In this paper I review Infomax International PTY Ltd v Clarius Group Ltd (No 2) [2011] FCA 934. View<a title="View - Jeffrey Phillips on the case" href="http://jeffreyphillipssc.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/Workplace-Review-Summer-2011_On-the-Case-Jeffrey-Phillips-SC.pdf" target="_blank"> <em>"Jeffrey Phillips on the case"</em></a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>https://jeffreyphillipssc.com.au/paper-tiger-informax-international-v-clarius-group/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>On The Case &#8211; Federal Court comedian discovers industrial labyrinth</title>
		<link>https://jeffreyphillipssc.com.au/on-the-case-federal-court-comedian-discovers-industral-labyrinth/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=on-the-case-federal-court-comedian-discovers-industral-labyrinth</link>
		<comments>https://jeffreyphillipssc.com.au/on-the-case-federal-court-comedian-discovers-industral-labyrinth/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 09 Nov 2011 12:18:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Jeffrey Phillips SC</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Legal - Case Notes]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://jeffreyphillipssc.com.au/?p=722</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<a href="http://jeffreyphillipssc.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/Workplace-Review-Spring-2011-On-the-Case-Deva-v-University-of-Western-Sydney.pdf" target="_blank">Deva v University of Western Sydney</a>.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>https://jeffreyphillipssc.com.au/on-the-case-federal-court-comedian-discovers-industral-labyrinth/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Of Roosters, Ducks and Elephants</title>
		<link>https://jeffreyphillipssc.com.au/of-roosters-ducks-and-elephants/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=of-roosters-ducks-and-elephants</link>
		<comments>https://jeffreyphillipssc.com.au/of-roosters-ducks-and-elephants/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 06 Sep 2011 13:04:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Jeffrey Phillips SC</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Legal - Case Notes]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://jeffreyphillipssc.com.au/?p=701</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ON CALL INTERPRETERS AND TRANSLATORS AGENCY PTY LIMITED v COMMISSIONER OF TAXATION (NO.3) [2011] FCA 366 (13 APRIL 2011)

Justice Bromberg has provided a useful summary of the applicable law in relation to the common dispute as to whether a particular person is an employee or an independent contractor.  This case involved a challenge by On Call Interpreters and Translators Agency Pty Limited (On Call) against  a finding by the Commissioner of Taxation that its interpreters and translators were properly characterised as employees . As a consequence of which On Call should have paid the superannuation guarantee charge on the remuneration it had paid. In reaching his conclusion, Justice Bromberg traversed the major authorities and tests established by the High Court and other senior courts . He supported the need to go behind the label parties may expressly place upon their relationship in order to determine its proper legal characterisation.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>https://jeffreyphillipssc.com.au/of-roosters-ducks-and-elephants/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>160</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Spanky Banky&#8217;s Employment Tribunal</title>
		<link>https://jeffreyphillipssc.com.au/spanky-bankys-employment-tribunal/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=spanky-bankys-employment-tribunal</link>
		<comments>https://jeffreyphillipssc.com.au/spanky-bankys-employment-tribunal/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 01 May 2011 02:50:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Jeffrey Phillips SC</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Legal - Case Notes]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://jeffreyphillipssc.com.au/?p=630</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<strong>On The Case By Jeffrey Phillips</strong>
<table border="0" cellspacing="8" cellpadding="8">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://jeffreyphillipssc.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/ban-ki-moon-and-kevin-rudd.jpg"><img class="alignnone size-thumbnail wp-image-634" title="ban-ki-moon-and-kevin-rudd" src="http://jeffreyphillipssc.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/ban-ki-moon-and-kevin-rudd-150x150.jpg" alt="" width="150" height="150" /></a></td>
<td>1.	In the ABC Insiders’ compere Barry Cassidy’s new book called, <em>“Party Thieves”</em> (Melbourne University Press), former Prime Minister Kevin Rudd is said    to have referred to the United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon  as  <em>“Spanky Banky”</em>.   However, New South Wales Supreme Court  Justice  Michael Adams, in a  series of decisions , whilst on secondment  to the  United Nations’   internal  employee tribunal , the United  Nations  Dispute Tribunal( UNDT)  has given some UN officials a thorough   spanking.  (See Betucci ats  Secretary-General of the <a title="United Nations Judgement No. 59 (NY/2010)Rev.1" href="http://www.un.org/en/oaj/files/undt/orders/ny-2010-059.pdf" target="_blank">United Nations Judgment Order No. 59(NY/2010)/Rev.1</a>. Justice Adams who a few years ago, delivered a leading case on  gross    workplace bullying (Naidu ats Group 4 Securitas Pty Limited &#38; Anor    [2005] NSWSC 618) was not going to be bullied by some unknown UN    officials unwilling to submit to the orders of their own tribunal.</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>https://jeffreyphillipssc.com.au/spanky-bankys-employment-tribunal/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>298</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Revenge of Ronald McDonald</title>
		<link>https://jeffreyphillipssc.com.au/McDonalds-Australia-Enterprise-Agreement-2009-Appeal-2010?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=the-revenge-of-ronald-mcdonald</link>
		<comments>https://jeffreyphillipssc.com.au/McDonalds-Australia-Enterprise-Agreement-2009-Appeal-2010#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Jul 2010 04:53:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Jeffrey Phillips SC</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Legal - Case Notes]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://jeffreyphillipssc.com.au/?p=549</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<strong><em><span style="text-decoration: underline;"> </span></em></strong>

<img class="alignnone size-full wp-image-561" title="McDonald's Australia Pty Ltd on behalf of Operators of McDonald's outlets - re McDonald's Australia Enterprise Agreement 2009 [2010] FWA 1347 (23 April 2010)" src="http://jeffreyphillipssc.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/McDonalds-11.jpg" alt="McDonald's Australia Pty Ltd on behalf of Operators of McDonald's outlets - re McDonald's Australia Enterprise Agreement 2009 [2010] FWA 1347 (23 April 2010)" width="150" height="197" />

<a href="http://www.fwa.gov.au/decisionssigned/html/2010fwafb4602.htm"><em>McDonald’s Australia Enterprise Agreement 2009 Appeal [2010] FWAFB 4602</em></a>

A Full Bench of Fair Work Australia (FWA) (Vice President Watson, Senior Deputy President Kaufman and Commissioner Raffaelli) on the 21 July 2010, have handed down its reasons for a decision in an appeal relating to the McDonald’s Australia Enterprise Agreement 2009.  The decision at first instance was reported  in <strong>Workplace Review</strong> (see (2010) 1 WR 20) in an article entitled “<em>Egg McMuffin Over The Face</em>” dealing with the decision of Commissioner Donna McKenna (<em>[2010] FWA 1347</em> ,23 April 2010), in which she refused to approve the Enterprise Agreement  covering McDonald’s  80,000 employees at its many outlets throughout Australia<em>.</em>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>https://jeffreyphillipssc.com.au/McDonalds-Australia-Enterprise-Agreement-2009-Appeal-2010/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>151</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Be nice and work it out my way</title>
		<link>https://jeffreyphillipssc.com.au/cfmeu-mining-and-energy-division-ats-tahmoor-coal/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=cfmeu-mining-and-energy-division-ats-tahmoor-coal</link>
		<comments>https://jeffreyphillipssc.com.au/cfmeu-mining-and-energy-division-ats-tahmoor-coal/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 12 May 2010 01:19:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Jeffrey Phillips SC</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Legal - Case Notes]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://jeffreyphillipssc.com.au/?p=493</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<img class="alignnone size-full wp-image-494" title="cfmeu" src="http://jeffreyphillipssc.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/cfmeu_small.gif" alt="" width="180" height="220" />

<a href="http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/sinodisp/au/cases/cth/FWA/2010/942.html?stem=0&#38;synonyms=0&#38;query=tahmoor%20and%20coal" target="_blank"><em>Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union – Mining and Energy Division ats Tahmoor Coal Pty Limited </em>[2010] FWAFB 3510.</a>

This  decision deals with good faith bargaining requirements under the Fair Work Act ( the Act), which was on appeal from a decision of Commissioner Roberts of the 12 February 2010 (see [2010] FWA 942).  Permission was granted to appeal in the public interest, as the appeal was said to raise matters for consideration concerning important new statutory provisions, which had not been considered at a Full Bench level before [1].

The case below was one in which  the CFMEU, on behalf of its members working in this coal mine, had sought a number of bargaining orders.  The CFMEU was unsuccessful and on appeal, narrowed the nature of the orders it sought.  The making of bargaining orders, comes under Chapter 2, Division 8 of the<em> Act</em>.  That division is headed, “<em>FWA’s General Role in Facilitating Bargaining</em>”.  This case highlights the role that <em>Fair Work Australia</em> will have, and the circumstances in which that tribunal can be enlisted to assist parties to reach an agreement.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>https://jeffreyphillipssc.com.au/cfmeu-mining-and-energy-division-ats-tahmoor-coal/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Adverse Action Injuction Lifted</title>
		<link>https://jeffreyphillipssc.com.au/adverse-action-jones-ats-queensland-tertiary-admissions-centre/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=adverse-action-jones-ats-queensland-tertiary-admissions-centre</link>
		<comments>https://jeffreyphillipssc.com.au/adverse-action-jones-ats-queensland-tertiary-admissions-centre/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 07 May 2010 00:46:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Jeffrey Phillips SC</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Legal - Case Notes]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://jeffreyphillipssc.com.au/?p=468</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<a href="http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/sinodisp/au/cases/cth/FCA/2010/399.html?stem=0&#38;synonyms=0&#38;query=^Queensland%20Tertiary%20Amissions%20Centre" target="_blank"><em>Jones ats Queensland Tertiary Admissions Centre Limited (No.2), </em>[2010] FCA 399 (29<sup>th</sup> April 2010).</a>

Justice Collier of the Federal Court of Australia, sitting at Brisbane, had earlier issued interlocutory orders restraining QTAC from taking any action against the Applicant, Ms Jones until the hearing of the substantive Application filed in these proceedings.  See <a href="http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/sinodisp/au/cases/cth/FCA/2009/1382.html?stem=0&#38;synonyms=0&#38;query=^Queensland%20Tertiary%20Amissions%20Centre" target="_blank"><em>Jones ats Queensland Tertiary Admissions Centre Limited </em>(2009) FCA 1382</a>, and also the comment published on this website on the 3 December 2009.

After having heard the substantive application, Justice Collier dismissed Ms Jones’ application.  Ms Jones, who was the Chief Executive Officer of QTAC, had been the subject of serious bullying allegations by individual employees of QTAC and the Australian Services Union (“ASU”) [1].  Ms Jones had claimed that the ASU had orchestrated a campaign against her, relevant to her conduct in the 2009 enterprise bargaining negotiations as spokesperson for QTAC. Further, that in taking adverse action against her, it was alleged that QTAC had yielded and continues to yield to this campaign by the ASU, in contravention of the <em>Fair Work Act 2009</em>.  Ms Jones had sought many orders in her application, amongst which was that her employer not act upon any investigation report received concerning her alleged behaviour. ]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>https://jeffreyphillipssc.com.au/adverse-action-jones-ats-queensland-tertiary-admissions-centre/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>159</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Egg McMuffin Over The Face</title>
		<link>https://jeffreyphillipssc.com.au/mcdonalds-australia-enterprise-agreement-2009/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=mcdonalds-australia-enterprise-agreement-2009</link>
		<comments>https://jeffreyphillipssc.com.au/mcdonalds-australia-enterprise-agreement-2009/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Apr 2010 05:19:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Jeffrey Phillips SC</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Legal - Case Notes]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://jeffreyphillipssc.com.au/?p=455</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<img class="alignnone size-full wp-image-456" title="mcdonalds" src="http://jeffreyphillipssc.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/mcdonalds.jpg" alt="McDonald’s Australia Enterprise Agreement 2009 " width="250" height="193" />

<a href="http://www.fwa.gov.au/decisionssigned/html/2010fwa1347.htm" target="_blank"><em>McDonald’s Australia Enterprise Agreement 2009  [2010]  FWA 1347. ( 23 rd April 2010)</em></a>

Commissioner Donna “Big Mac” McKenna, formerly of the Industrial Relations Commission of New South Wales, now a Commissioner of Fair Work Australia, has rejected an Application filed by Mc Donald’s, for an Enterprise Agreement to cover its 80,000 employees, employed in all McDonald’s outlets in Australia.  The Application under s 185 of the Fair Work Act  filed  by McDonald’s was supported by the union,  the Shop Distributive and Allied Employees Association (SDA) which  was closely involved in the making of the Agreement  and supported its approval .  The Commissioner handed down a 102 page judgment of 383 paragraphs, setting out many reasons why the approval of the  proposed  Agreement would be declined .

The length of the judgment is more telling, in that there was no contradictor in the case.  The application for approval had been filed last December.  The matter had been listed  for hearing at various times earlier this year when  the Commissioner had raised a number of preliminary concerns about the Application.  In February this year, she made a Statement expressing further concerns about the proposed Agreement.  The parties provided  statutory declarations in addition to the material originally filed, in order to allay the concerns of the Commissioner.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>https://jeffreyphillipssc.com.au/mcdonalds-australia-enterprise-agreement-2009/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>134</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
