King v Melbourne Vicentre Swimming Club Inc [2021] FCAFC 123
The Award's Level 4 criteria set minimum, not maximum, requirements for coverage of swim coaches. Mr King's Silver Licence and duties exceeding the minimum did not exclude him; he was employed subject to Level 4 of the Fitness Industry Award 2010 during the relevant period.
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 15 July 2021
- Procedural Posture
- Appeal / Determination of Preliminary Issue on Appeal
- Outcome
- Appeal allowed; prior orders set aside; matter remitted for trial of remaining issues.
- Legal Topics
- ['interpretation of Industrial Awards' 'award Coverage for Swim Coaches' 'fitness Industry Award 2010' 'employment Classification']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Determination of Preliminary Issue on Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 ['Whether Mr King was covered by the Fitness Industry Award 2010 during employment' 'Whether his classification was Level 4 under the Award' 'Construction of Award provisions for swim coaching roles']
Ratio Decidendi
The Award's Level 4 criteria set minimum, not maximum, requirements for coverage of swim coaches. Mr King's Silver Licence and duties exceeding the minimum did not exclude him; he was employed subject to Level 4 of the Fitness Industry Award 2010 during the relevant period.
Court Disposition
Appeal allowed; prior orders set aside; matter remitted for trial of remaining issues.
Orders
- ['The appeal is allowed.' 'Paragraph 1 of the orders of 18 August 2020 and paragraph 4 of the orders of 21 August 2020 are set aside.' "It is declared that between 29 May 2012 and 28 May 2018, the applicant's employment with the first respondent was covered by the Fitness Industry Award 2010." 'The Level 4...
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment