Anna MacKowaik v Kimberly-Clark Australia [1995] IRCA 473

Anna MacKowaik v Kimberly-Clark Australia [1995] IRCA 473

The applicant was dismissed for a physical disability, but the respondent proved that the disability prevented her from performing essential aspects and inherent requirements of her production line position, including performing the full range of duties at normal speed without slowing production or impairing ergonomic rotation for other workers. That also constituted a valid reason for termination. The respondent had consulted on rehabilitation, attempted rehabilitation, searched for alternative employment, and made clear to the applicant that her continued employment was in question, so there was no procedural unfairness or breach of section 170DC. Although the termination caused...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
07 September 1995
Procedural Posture
Application Under Section 170 EA of the Industrial Relations Act 1988 Concerning Termination of Employment / Reasons for Judgment and Minutes of Order
Outcome
Application dismissed.
Legal Topics
['unlawful Termination' 'physical Disability' 'inherent Requirements of the Particular Position' 'valid Reason for Termination' 'harsh, Unjust or Unreasonable Termination' 'rehabilitation and Alternative Employment']
['industrial Law' 'employment Law'] ['unlawful Termination' 'physical Disability' 'inherent Requirements of the Particular Position' 'valid Reason for Termination' 'harsh, Unjust or Unreasonable Termination' 'rehabilitation and Alternative Employment']

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

Application Under Section 170 EA of the Industrial Relations Act 1988 Concerning Termination of Employment / Reasons for Judgment and Minutes of Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the applicant's employment was terminated for physical disability contrary to section 170DF(1)(f) of the Industrial Relations Act 1988." 'Whether the respondent proved that the physical disability was a reason based on the inherent requirements of the particular position under section 170DF(2).' 'Whether there was a valid reason for termination under section 170DE(1).' 'Whether the termination was harsh, unjust or unreasonable within the meaning of section 170DE(2).' 'Whether there was a breach of section 170DC.']

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant was dismissed for a physical disability, but the respondent proved that the disability prevented her from performing essential aspects and inherent requirements of her production line position, including performing the full range of duties at normal speed without slowing production or impairing ergonomic rotation for other workers. That also constituted a valid reason for termination. The respondent had consulted on rehabilitation, attempted rehabilitation, searched for alternative employment, and made clear to the applicant that her continued employment was in question, so there was no procedural unfairness or breach of section 170DC. Although the termination caused...

Court Disposition

Application dismissed.

Orders

  • ['The application be dismissed.']