Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Limited v Australian Industrial Relations Commission, in the matter of Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Limited [2003] FCAFC 238

Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Limited v Australian Industrial Relations Commission, in the matter of Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Limited [2003] FCAFC 238

Section 170N of the Workplace Relations Act 1996 (Cth) does not bar the Commission from determining ANZ's 27 March 2002 application to vary the Award in relation to severance pay for the 476 (or 479) employees who became ING employees, as the application concerned a completed historical circumstance and was not a matter at issue during the pending bargaining period.

Parties
Applicant/prosecutor/respondent/second Applicant: Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Limited; First Respondent/applicant: Australian Industrial Relations Commission (Giudice J, Watson SDP, Cribb C); Applicant/prosecutor/respondent/second Respondent/second Applicant: Finance Sector Union of Australia
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
28 October 2003
Procedural Posture
Prerogative Relief and Declaratory Relief Applications (remittal From High Court) / Full Federal Court; Post Remittal and Final Judgment
Outcome
Application for prerogative relief refused; declaration granted that s 170N does not bar the Commission's determination of the application to vary the Award.
Legal Topics
Prerogative Relief, Severance Pay, Interpretation of Award and Certified Agreement, Jurisdiction of Australian Industrial Relations Commission, Bargaining Period Under Workplace Relations Act 1996 (cth), Arbitration Power Limitations
Industrial Relations Employment Law Prerogative Relief Severance Pay Interpretation of Award and Certified Agreement Jurisdiction of Australian Industrial Relations Commission Bargaining Period Under Workplace Relations Act 1996 (cth) Arbitration Power Limitations

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

Parties

Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Limited

Applicant/prosecutor/respondent/second Applicant

Australian Industrial Relations Commission (Giudice J, Watson SDP, Cribb C)

First Respondent/applicant

Finance Sector Union of Australia

Applicant/prosecutor/respondent/second Respondent/second Applicant

Procedural Posture

Prerogative Relief and Declaratory Relief Applications (remittal From High Court) / Full Federal Court; Post Remittal and Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Australian Industrial Relations Commission had jurisdiction to determine ANZ's application to vary severance pay
  2. 2 Whether s 170N of the Workplace Relations Act 1996 (Cth) barred the Commission from arbitrating a claim for variation of severance pay during a bargaining period
  3. 3 Interpretation of 'required severance pay' in the Award and its relation to the Agreement

Ratio Decidendi

Section 170N of the Workplace Relations Act 1996 (Cth) does not bar the Commission from determining ANZ's 27 March 2002 application to vary the Award in relation to severance pay for the 476 (or 479) employees who became ING employees, as the application concerned a completed historical circumstance and was not a matter at issue during the pending bargaining period.

Court Disposition

Application for prerogative relief refused; declaration granted that s 170N does not bar the Commission's determination of the application to vary the Award.

Orders

  • Section 170N does not constitute a bar to a determination by the Commission of ANZ's application of 27 March 2002 to vary the Award in relation to severance pay.
  • The application seeking prerogative relief is refused.