Sydney Tower Restaurants Pty Ltd v Zhang & Anor [2004] NSWIRComm 250

Sydney Tower Restaurants Pty Ltd v Zhang & Anor [2004] NSWIRComm 250

Leave to appeal was refused because the appeal did not disclose industry-wide implications on the evidence and the Chief Industrial Magistrate made no error in applying the Award to the facts. It was open to find that, in the fine dining context of the Centrepoint Tower Restaurant and having regard to the specialist duties and money-handling responsibilities found on the evidence, the respondents were properly classified as Grade 4 under cl 3 of the Award. The words in cl 23.2 of the Award were wide enough to cover clothing that could not be used for everyday use because the conditions of its required work use precluded such use; the daily laundering requirement for the trousers meant the...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
23 August 2004
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Appeal and Appeal Pursuant to S 197 of the Industrial Relations Act 1996 / Appeal From Decision and Orders of the Chief Industrial Magistrate Given on 11 September 2003 and 23 October 2003
Outcome
Leave to appeal refused; appeal dismissed; appellant ordered to pay the respondents' costs of the appeal.
Legal Topics
['award Classification' 'recovery of Wages and Allowances' 'restaurant Employees' 'leave to Appeal' 'construction of Award' 'laundry Allowance' 'costs']
['industrial Relations' 'employment Law'] ['award Classification' 'recovery of Wages and Allowances' 'restaurant Employees' 'leave to Appeal' 'construction of Award' 'laundry Allowance' 'costs']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Application for Leave to Appeal and Appeal Pursuant to S 197 of the Industrial Relations Act 1996 / Appeal From Decision and Orders of the Chief Industrial Magistrate Given on 11 September 2003 and 23 October 2003

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether leave to appeal should be granted under s 188 of the Industrial Relations Act 1996 for an appeal under s 197 of the Act.' 'Whether the Chief Industrial Magistrate erred in construing cl 3 of the Restaurant Employees (State) Interim Consolidated Award and classifying the respondents as Grade 4 rather than Grade 3 employees.' 'Whether the Chief Industrial Magistrate erred in finding that the laundry allowance under cl 23 of the Restaurant Employees (State) Interim Consolidated Award was payable for clothing required by the employer.' 'Whether the decision below raised issues of law or principle with industry-wide practical application.']

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to appeal was refused because the appeal did not disclose industry-wide implications on the evidence and the Chief Industrial Magistrate made no error in applying the Award to the facts. It was open to find that, in the fine dining context of the Centrepoint Tower Restaurant and having regard to the specialist duties and money-handling responsibilities found on the evidence, the respondents were properly classified as Grade 4 under cl 3 of the Award. The words in cl 23.2 of the Award were wide enough to cover clothing that could not be used for everyday use because the conditions of its required work use precluded such use; the daily laundering requirement for the trousers meant the...

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal refused; appeal dismissed; appellant ordered to pay the respondents' costs of the appeal.

Orders

  • ['Leave to appeal is refused.' 'The appeal is dismissed.' "The appellant is to pay the respondents' costs of the appeal in an amount as agreed, or, in default of agreement, as assessed."]