Australian Postal Corporation v Stephens [2011] FCA 947

Australian Postal Corporation v Stephens [2011] FCA 947

The reinstatement order operated from 8 July 2011 to restore Mr Stephens to his former fixed-term employment only for the balance of its term, namely nine further working days, rather than for a longer or indeterminate term. Because Australia Post was obliged to comply from 8 July 2011 and the practical time for compliance had already expired, no useful purpose would be served by a stay; the stay application was therefore misconceived and refused.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
11 August 2011
Procedural Posture
Fair Work Division Application Concerning Stay of Federal Magistrates Court Reinstatement Order Pending Application for Leave to Appeal / Interlocutory Application for Stay
Outcome
Interlocutory application for stay dismissed; application for leave to appeal fixed for hearing.
Legal Topics
['reinstatement Under S 545(2)(c) of the Fair Work Act 2009 (cth)' 'fixed Term Employment Contract' 'stay Pending Leave to Appeal' 'unexpired Term of Employment Contract']
['industrial Law' 'employment Law' 'statutory Interpretation'] ['reinstatement Under S 545(2)(c) of the Fair Work Act 2009 (cth)' 'fixed Term Employment Contract' 'stay Pending Leave to Appeal' 'unexpired Term of Employment Contract']

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

Fair Work Division Application Concerning Stay of Federal Magistrates Court Reinstatement Order Pending Application for Leave to Appeal / Interlocutory Application for Stay

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Federal Magistrates Court order reinstating Mr Stephens operated to reinstate him for the unexpired nine working days of his previous fixed-term contract or for an indeterminate term.' "Whether the reinstatement order should be stayed pending determination of Australia Post's application for leave to appeal." 'Whether the application for leave to appeal was incompetent because the reinstatement order was final.']

Ratio Decidendi

The reinstatement order operated from 8 July 2011 to restore Mr Stephens to his former fixed-term employment only for the balance of its term, namely nine further working days, rather than for a longer or indeterminate term. Because Australia Post was obliged to comply from 8 July 2011 and the practical time for compliance had already expired, no useful purpose would be served by a stay; the stay application was therefore misconceived and refused.

Court Disposition

Interlocutory application for stay dismissed; application for leave to appeal fixed for hearing.

Orders

  • ['The interlocutory application filed on 4 August 2011 be dismissed.' 'The application for leave to appeal filed on 29 July 2011 be fixed for hearing on 19 August 2011 at 10:15am.' 'The applicant serve and provide a copy to the associate to Rares J any further written submissions in support of its application for...