Mondelez Australia Pty Ltd v Automotive, Food, Metals, Engineering, Printing and Kindred Industries UnionMinister for Jobs and Industrial Relations v Automotive, Food, Metals, Engineering, Printing and Kindred Industries UnionCitation:[2020] HCA 29Before:Kiefel CJ, Gageler, Nettle, Gordon, Edelman JJDate:13 Aug 2020Case Number:M160/2019, M165/2019Read more

Mondelez Australia Pty Ltd v Automotive, Food, Metals, Engineering, Printing and Kindred Industries UnionMinister for Jobs and Industrial Relations v Automotive, Food, Metals, Engineering, Printing and Kindred Industries UnionCitation:[2020] HCA 29Before:Kiefel CJ, Gageler, Nettle, Gordon, Edelman JJDate:13 Aug 2020Case Number:M160/2019, M165/2019Read more

The Court held that 'day' in s 96(1) of the Fair Work Act means a 'notional day' calculated as one-tenth of the equivalent of the employee's ordinary hours of work in a two-week period, not a portion of a 24-hour period otherwise allotted to working.

Parties
Applicant: Unknown Applicant(s); Respondent: Unknown Respondent(s)
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
13 August 2020
Procedural Posture
Industrial Law / Judgment
Outcome
appeal allowed
Legal Topics
National Employment Standards, Paid Personal/carer's Leave, Enterprise Agreement, Interpretation of 'day' Under Fair Work Act
Employment Law Industrial Law National Employment Standards Paid Personal/carer's Leave Enterprise Agreement Interpretation of 'day' Under Fair Work Act

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 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Unknown Applicant(s)

Applicant

Unknown Respondent(s)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Industrial Law / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether 'day' in s 96(1) of Fair Work Act refers to one-tenth of equivalent of employee's ordinary hours of work in two-week period or a portion of 24-hour period otherwise allotted to working

Ratio Decidendi

The Court held that 'day' in s 96(1) of the Fair Work Act means a 'notional day' calculated as one-tenth of the equivalent of the employee's ordinary hours of work in a two-week period, not a portion of a 24-hour period otherwise allotted to working.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed

Orders

  • The appeal is allowed. The interpretation of 'day' in s 96(1) of the Fair Work Act is as a 'notional day' based on ordinary hours of work.