Zoe

Where to start with an Australian legal problem: plain-English guides, with the legislation and case law behind them.

Platform

Legislation
Cases
Guides
Find a lawyer
Absurdities
Ask Zoe
Graph
Recently analysed

Free tools

Bond claim checker
Barking dog and noise diary
Support at Home statement check
All tools

Lawyers: our picks

Zoe

Where to start with an Australian legal problem: plain-English guides, with the legislation and case law behind them.

Platform

Legislation
Cases
Guides
Find a lawyer
Absurdities
Ask Zoe
Graph
Recently analysed

Free tools

Bond claim checker
Barking dog and noise diary
Support at Home statement check
All tools

Lawyers: our picks

Lawyers in Sydney
Lawyers in Melbourne
Lawyers in Brisbane
Lawyers in Perth
Family lawyers
Employment lawyers
Criminal lawyers
Wills and estates lawyers
Find a lawyer

Company

Pricing
API
Privacy
Terms
Support
X
LinkedIn
Instagram

Jurisdictions

Commonwealth
New South Wales
Queensland
Victoria
Western Australia
South Australia
Tasmania
Australian Capital Territory
Northern Territory

Zoe is a legal information platform. Always consult the Federal Register of Legislation for authoritative text.

Zoe

Legislation Cases Guides Find a lawyer Absurdities Ask Zoe Graph Pricing

Ask Zoe →

Home/Cases/[1998] FCA 1793

CTHFCA

Australian Industry Group & Anor v Automotive Food Metals Engineering Printing & Kindred Industries Union [1998] FCA 1793

[1998] FCA 1793

Federal Court of Australia|1998-11-17

View original source

At a glance

Source facts

Court

Federal Court of Australia

Decision date

1998-11-17

Source

Original judgment source is linked above.

Judgment (1 paragraphs)

[1]

The reference to "Workplace Relations Commission" which appears three times in this judgment should be amended to read "Industrial Relations Commission".

Cited By (1)

Transfield Construction Pty Ltd v Automotive Food, Metal, Engineering, Printing and Kindred Industries Union

Australian Industry Group & Anor v Automotive Food Metals Engineering... [1998] FCA 1793 | Case summary | Zoe