WorkPac Pty Ltd v Rossato [2021] HCA 23

WorkPac Pty Ltd v Rossato [2021] HCA 23

Mr Rossato was a casual employee for the purposes of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) and the enterprise agreement because, under the terms of his contracts with WorkPac, there was no firm advance commitment by the employer to continuing and indefinite work beyond each assignment. The character of employment is determined by contractual rights and obligations, not by post-contractual conduct or regular work arrangements. The rosters and systematic work did not amount to a binding commitment to ongoing employment beyond each assignment.

Parties
Appellant: WorkPac Pty Ltd; First Respondent: Robert Rossato; Second Respondent: The Minister; Third Respondent: The CFMMEU; Fourth Respondent: Mr Petersen
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
04 August 2021
Procedural Posture
Appeal / High Court Judgment
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Casual Employment, Contract of Employment, Employment Entitlements, Statutory Interpretation, Enterprise Agreements, National Employment Standards
Industrial Law Employment Law Casual Employment Contract of Employment Employment Entitlements Statutory Interpretation Enterprise Agreements National Employment Standards

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 4 Authorities cited 20 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

WorkPac Pty Ltd

Appellant

Robert Rossato

First Respondent

The Minister

Second Respondent

The CFMMEU

Third Respondent

Mr Petersen

Fourth Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / High Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Mr Rossato was a casual employee for the purposes of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) and the relevant enterprise agreement
  2. 2 Whether there existed a firm advance commitment to ongoing employment such that the relationship was not casual employment
  3. 3 Whether regular work patterns and roster arrangements are indicative of a firm advance commitment to employment

Ratio Decidendi

Mr Rossato was a casual employee for the purposes of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) and the enterprise agreement because, under the terms of his contracts with WorkPac, there was no firm advance commitment by the employer to continuing and indefinite work beyond each assignment. The character of employment is determined by contractual rights and obligations, not by post-contractual conduct or regular work arrangements. The rosters and systematic work did not amount to a binding commitment to ongoing employment beyond each assignment.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Set aside the orders made by the Full Court of the Federal Court of Australia on 29 May 2020.
  • Declare that Mr Rossato was a casual employee for the purposes of ss 86, 95 and 106 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) in respect of each of the six assignments with WorkPac Pty Ltd between 28 July 2014 and 9 April 2018.