Oyang v Community Relations Commission [2011] NSWIRComm 1013

Oyang v Community Relations Commission [2011] NSWIRComm 1013

Although CRC had not fully complied with all procedural steps in its Complaints Handling Policy and Procedures, it had substantially complied and the Commission could determine the disciplinary appeal on its merits under s 100C(3)(a) of the Industrial Relations Act 1996. The appellant was given adequate opportunities to explain her non-attendance and failed to take responsibility or improve. The evidence proved that she repeatedly failed to attend previously accepted interpreting assignments and failed to notify CRC, undermining CRC's service quality and reputation. The charge concerning translation errors was not proven because of lack of procedural fairness. Given the protective nature...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
22 March 2011
Procedural Posture
Disciplinary Appeal Against Suspension / Principal Judgment
Outcome
The appeal is disallowed.
Legal Topics
['procedural Fairness' 'casual Interpreter and Translator Employment' 'non Attendance at Accepted Assignments' 'translation Errors' 'protective Disciplinary Jurisdiction' 'suspension']
['industrial Relations' 'public Sector Employment' 'disciplinary Proceedings'] ['procedural Fairness' 'casual Interpreter and Translator Employment' 'non Attendance at Accepted Assignments' 'translation Errors' 'protective Disciplinary Jurisdiction' 'suspension']

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 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Disciplinary Appeal Against Suspension / Principal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the charges of non-attendance of previously accepted assignments and translation errors were proven.' 'Whether the appellant was afforded procedural fairness in relation to the charges.' 'Whether the disciplinary sanction of suspension from employment from 15 October 2010 until 31 March 2011 was appropriate in all the circumstances given the protective jurisdiction of the Commission under Division 3 of Part 7 of the Industrial Relations Act 1996.']

Ratio Decidendi

Although CRC had not fully complied with all procedural steps in its Complaints Handling Policy and Procedures, it had substantially complied and the Commission could determine the disciplinary appeal on its merits under s 100C(3)(a) of the Industrial Relations Act 1996. The appellant was given adequate opportunities to explain her non-attendance and failed to take responsibility or improve. The evidence proved that she repeatedly failed to attend previously accepted interpreting assignments and failed to notify CRC, undermining CRC's service quality and reputation. The charge concerning translation errors was not proven because of lack of procedural fairness. Given the protective nature...

Court Disposition

The appeal is disallowed.

Orders

  • ['The appeal is disallowed.']