3 Aug 2012
The respondent's enterprise is the wholesale supply of dairy products with delivery being an integral part of that single business activity rather than a separate activity under s170(2); therefore the most accurate classification is ANZSIC Dairy Produce Wholesaling and not Road Freight Transport; appellant must reclassify accordingly.
15 Sept 2011
The court found the appellant's activities are maintenance and repair of fixtures and fittings, not building construction or structural work; ANZSIC CU 41120's primary activities relate to construction/renovation of residential buildings and do not describe the appellant's tasks, whereas CU 42342 Building Installation Services (not elsewhere classified) more closely matches his activities; accordingly ACC must transfer the appellant to CU 42342 with effect from the date ACC identified the misclassification.
4 Jun 1999
The Court held the appellant carried on a single activity — publishing — and that modern methods of dissemination (print, CD-ROM, online) do not create distinct and independent activities for premium classification; accordingly the correct classification unit for 1995-1997 is 24221 (other periodical publishing (excluding printing)). Alternatively, even if two activities existed, the appellant did not maintain contemporaneous separate accounting and employee earning records as required, so multiple classification units would not apply. Appeal allowed and respondent decision revoked.
11 Sept 1998
The appellant's overall business activities and workforce skills align with classification 21130 (Bacon, Ham and Smallgood Manufacturing / meat specialties manufacturing n.e.c.) rather than 21110; accordingly the appeal is allowed and the appellant's classification for the relevant premium year is 21130.
30 Apr 1998
The Court held that the Main Contracting Administration and Management division and the Building Construction division were distinct and independent activities and that the respondent maintained separate accounting and wage records as required by the Regulations; accordingly the respondent was entitled to separate classification units and the Review Officer's decision confirming three classifications was upheld and the appeal dismissed.
6 Mar 1998
Appellant's principal activity is well drilling and not construction; because appellant does not maintain separate records Regulation 4(2) requires selecting a classification encompassing the whole activity with the highest prescribed premium; of available units CU41220 (non-building construction) is the most appropriate despite being a broad fit; appeal dismissed.