Labaj v Lollo Plumbing Pty Ltd (in liq)
[2004] QCA 331
To print this judgment please return to the case and click on the PDF icon
next to the
case name. For court use, a full PDF copy is required or preferred.
Exit Distraction Free Reading Mode
Please Note: You are about to print a copy of the onscreen
version of
this judgment. For court use, a full PDF copy of the judgment is required or preferred. Please
return to
the case for PDF printing options.
- Unreported Judgment
- Appeal Determined (QCA)
- Labaj v Lollo Plumbing Pty Ltd (in liq)[2004] QCA 331
- Add to List
Labaj v Lollo Plumbing Pty Ltd (in liq)[2004] QCA 331
Labaj v Lollo Plumbing Pty Ltd (in liq)[2004] QCA 331
COURT OF APPEAL
McMURDO P
No 7313 of 2004
JOHN LABAJ Appellant
and
LOLLO PLUMBING PTY LTD (in liquidation)First Respondent
and
HALL D R, President of the Industrial Court Second Respondent
BRISBANE
DATE 10/09/2004
ORDER
THE PRESIDENT: This appeal was filed on 23 August 2004. The Deputy-Registrar (Appeals) referred the matter to me because he was concerned about the competency of the appeal. I arranged for the matter to be listed today for Mr Labaj to show cause why the appeal should not be struck out as incompetent.
Mr Labaj's original claim relates to unpaid wages and was a claim in the Industrial Commission. He appealed to the Industrial Court of Queensland under s 341(1) of the Industrial Relations Act 1999 (Qld) ("the Act"). He claims he has a right of appeal to this Court under s 340 of the Act. The decision sought to be appealed from is not one within s 340 of the Act. Under s 349 of the Act a decision of the Industrial Court under s 341 is final.
Arguably, this Court has a right to nevertheless hear an appeal if there is want of jurisdiction although it may be that that is rather a matter to be dealt with by way of judicial review to a Judge of the trial division. Mr Labaj has in his notice of appeal alleged that President Hall exceeded jurisdiction in making the decisions or rulings under the provisions of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth). I have questioned him about this ground of appeal, he tells me that his argument is that President Hall exceeded jurisdiction in allowing an industrial advocate, Mr Nicholson, to appear for the first respondent in the matter at first instance contrary to the provisions of the Corporations Act and that this is the excess of jurisdiction.
Those grounds do not raise an excess of jurisdiction and do not in any way alter the position under s 349 of the Act, which makes the original decision sought to be appealed from final. It follows that the appeal is incompetent and must be struck out.
...
THE PRESIDENT: Yes. The order is the appeal is struck out as incompetent. There is no order as to costs.