INDUSTRIAL LAW – representative proceeding pursuant to Pt IVA of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) – junior doctors class action – application for relief under the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) – alleged breaches of enterprise agreements – claim for unpaid entitlement to unrostered overtime – meaning of the phrase “authorised hours” in applicable enterprise agreements – whether authorisation may be constituted by a request, requirement or other approval given by the employer – whether authorisation impliedly given may engage the payment obligation imposed by the relevant enterprise agreements – whether only an authorisation given by the employer consistently with a mode or process (policy) adopted by the employer will suffice to engage the payment obligation – whether, as a matter of fact, unrostered overtime was impliedly “authorised” by the employer – employer policies dealing with overtime relevant to whether, as a matter of fact, authorisation may be implied – policies that are unknown or not applied unlikely to have a bearing on authorisation – whether estoppel is available as a defence to a claim of unpaid entitlements under an enterprise agreement – principles for proving loss in an underpayment claim in the absence of precise evidence of hours worked – application allowed in part – common questions determined
Original article available at: https://www.judgments.fedcourt.gov.au/judgments/Judgments/fca/single/2023/2023fca0939
For more information, see the original judgement.
