Eddey v Alphaprint Pty Ltd [1996] IRCA 384

Eddey v Alphaprint Pty Ltd [1996] IRCA 384

The applicant was entitled to a $70,000 base salary package and merely chose to divert part of that package to Deluna Pty Ltd. Because he remained entitled to receive that amount in cash, the diverted payments formed part of his relevant wages. Applying Ardino and Fleming, his relevant wages exceeded the jurisdictional limit under s170CD, so the Court had no jurisdiction to hear the s170EA application. For the same reason, and following Ardino, the Court declined to allow the proposed associated jurisdiction claim under s430. The proceeding was unarguable and instituted without reasonable cause, justifying a costs order under s347.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
07 August 1996
Procedural Posture
Termination of Employment Application Under S170 EA of the Industrial Relations Act 1988 With Notices of Motion Concerning Jurisdiction, Associated Jurisdiction and Costs / Ex Tempore Reasons for Judgment and Minutes of Orders
Outcome
The respondent's jurisdiction motion was allowed, the s170EA application was dismissed, the applicant's motion to amend was refused, and costs were ordered against the applicant with a 21 day stay of the costs order.
Legal Topics
['termination of Employment' 'jurisdiction' 'relevant Wages' 'remuneration Package' 'associated Jurisdiction' 'costs Without Reasonable Cause']
['industrial Law' 'employment Law' 'practice and Procedure'] ['termination of Employment' 'jurisdiction' 'relevant Wages' 'remuneration Package' 'associated Jurisdiction' 'costs Without Reasonable Cause']

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

Termination of Employment Application Under S170 EA of the Industrial Relations Act 1988 With Notices of Motion Concerning Jurisdiction, Associated Jurisdiction and Costs / Ex Tempore Reasons for Judgment and Minutes of Orders

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the applicant's relevant wages exceeded the jurisdictional limit set by s170CD of the Industrial Relations Act 1988." "Whether payments directed by the applicant to Deluna Pty Ltd formed part of the applicant's relevant wages." 'Whether the Court should allow the applicant to amend his application to pursue common law claims in the associated jurisdiction under s430 of the Industrial Relations Act 1988.' 'Whether the proceeding was instituted without reasonable cause so as to justify a costs order under s347 of the Industrial Relations Act 1988.']

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant was entitled to a $70,000 base salary package and merely chose to divert part of that package to Deluna Pty Ltd. Because he remained entitled to receive that amount in cash, the diverted payments formed part of his relevant wages. Applying Ardino and Fleming, his relevant wages exceeded the jurisdictional limit under s170CD, so the Court had no jurisdiction to hear the s170EA application. For the same reason, and following Ardino, the Court declined to allow the proposed associated jurisdiction claim under s430. The proceeding was unarguable and instituted without reasonable cause, justifying a costs order under s347.

Court Disposition

The respondent's jurisdiction motion was allowed, the s170EA application was dismissed, the applicant's motion to amend was refused, and costs were ordered against the applicant with a 21 day stay of the costs order.

Orders

  • ["Paragraph 1 of the Respondent's Notice of Motion is allowed." 'The application under s170EA is dismissed.' "Paragraph 1 of the Applicant's Notice of Motion is refused." "The Applicant is ordered to pay the Respondent's costs of the proceedings, to be taxed by the District Registrar in default of agreement." 'Stay...