Colley v Futurebrand FHA Pty Ltd & Anor [2005] NSWCA 223

Colley v Futurebrand FHA Pty Ltd & Anor [2005] NSWCA 223

The claimant did not acquire an accrued or acquired right to commence proceedings under s 106 before filing her application; the amendment in s 108A(1), which prohibits applications relating to contracts with remuneration over $200,000 after its commencement, applies to contracts made before its commencement. Neither s 30(1) of the Interpretation Act 1987 nor the common law presumption against interference with vested rights protected the claimant’s abstract right to commence proceedings. Section 108A(1) presents a clear and unqualified restriction on jurisdiction.

Parties
Claimant: Suanne Colley; First Opponent: Futurebrand FHA Pty Ltd; Second Opponent: Industrial Relations Commission of New South Wales in Court Session
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
22 July 2005
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment
Outcome
Summons dismissed; claimant to pay the costs of the opponents, those of the second opponent as a submitting party.
Legal Topics
Unfair Work Contracts, Statutory Interpretation, Retrospective Legislation, Jurisdiction
Contracts Industrial Law Unfair Work Contracts Statutory Interpretation Retrospective Legislation Jurisdiction

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 4 Authorities cited 22 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Suanne Colley

Claimant

Futurebrand FHA Pty Ltd

First Opponent

Industrial Relations Commission of New South Wales in Court Session

Second Opponent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the right to apply to the Industrial Relations Commission under s 106 of the Industrial Relations Act 1996 was accrued or acquired before proceedings commenced
  2. 2 Effect of s 108A(1) amendment on jurisdiction for contracts with remuneration over $200,000
  3. 3 Application of s 30(1) of the Interpretation Act 1987 and common law presumption against interference with vested rights

Ratio Decidendi

The claimant did not acquire an accrued or acquired right to commence proceedings under s 106 before filing her application; the amendment in s 108A(1), which prohibits applications relating to contracts with remuneration over $200,000 after its commencement, applies to contracts made before its commencement. Neither s 30(1) of the Interpretation Act 1987 nor the common law presumption against interference with vested rights protected the claimant’s abstract right to commence proceedings. Section 108A(1) presents a clear and unqualified restriction on jurisdiction.

Court Disposition

Summons dismissed; claimant to pay the costs of the opponents, those of the second opponent as a submitting party.

Orders

  • Summons dismissed.
  • Claimant to pay the costs of the opponents, those of the second opponent as a submitting party.