Forbes v Petbarn Pty Ltd [2018] FCA 256

Forbes v Petbarn Pty Ltd [2018] FCA 256

The appeal was dismissed because the Federal Circuit Court lacked jurisdiction to hear Ms Forbes’ unlawful termination claim; s 723 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) precluded her from making an unlawful termination application as she was entitled to make a general protections application. The purported certificate of the Fair Work Commission under s 776 was invalid and could not enliven the jurisdiction of the Federal Circuit Court. Claims against non-employer parties on the basis of accessorial liability under s 550 could not proceed because the same jurisdictional defect applied. Leave to appeal from summary dismissal was either not required or, if required, was granted, but the appeal...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
09 March 2018
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Application for Extension of Time and Leave to Appeal, and Appeal on the Substantive Merits Against Summary Dismissal in the Federal Circuit Court
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
['federal Jurisdiction' 'unlawful Termination' 'general Protections Application' 'accessorial Liability' 'summary Dismissal' 'procedural Fairness']
['employment Law' 'industrial Law'] ['federal Jurisdiction' 'unlawful Termination' 'general Protections Application' 'accessorial Liability' 'summary Dismissal' 'procedural Fairness']

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

Appeal / Application for Extension of Time and Leave to Appeal, and Appeal on the Substantive Merits Against Summary Dismissal in the Federal Circuit Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether order dismissing proceedings for want of jurisdiction was interlocutory or final' 'Whether leave to appeal was required from order of summary dismissal' 'Whether Fair Work Commission certificate under s 776 enlivened Federal Circuit Court jurisdiction' 'Whether Ms Forbes was barred from making an unlawful termination application due to entitlement to lodge a general protections application' 'Whether claims against non-employer respondents for accessorial liability could proceed']

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was dismissed because the Federal Circuit Court lacked jurisdiction to hear Ms Forbes’ unlawful termination claim; s 723 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) precluded her from making an unlawful termination application as she was entitled to make a general protections application. The purported certificate of the Fair Work Commission under s 776 was invalid and could not enliven the jurisdiction of the Federal Circuit Court. Claims against non-employer parties on the basis of accessorial liability under s 550 could not proceed because the same jurisdictional defect applied. Leave to appeal from summary dismissal was either not required or, if required, was granted, but the appeal...

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • ['Extension of time to seek leave to appeal from order of 1 August 2016 is allowed' 'Application for leave to appeal from orders made 1 August 2016 and 22 December 2016 is dismissed' 'To the extent required, leave to appeal from the 22 December 2016 summary dismissal is granted' 'The appeal is dismissed']