Lowe v Profound Dairy Management Pty Ltd [1996] IRCA 267

Lowe v Profound Dairy Management Pty Ltd [1996] IRCA 267

The applicant's employment was terminated at the initiative of the respondent in breach of Division III Part VIA of the Industrial Relations Act 1988. The respondent did not discharge its burden of proof to show a valid reason for termination and denied the applicant procedural fairness. The applicant was entitled to compensation up to the statutory ceiling, damages in lieu of notice, and payment of accrued entitlements.

Parties
Applicant: Barry John Lowe; Respondent: Profound Dairy Management Pty Ltd
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
25 June 1996
Procedural Posture
Industrial Law Termination of Employment / Decision After Undefended Hearing
Outcome
Applicant successful; compensation, damages, and other entitlements awarded.
Legal Topics
Termination of Employment, Compensation, Procedural Fairness, Overtime Pay, Annual Leave, Accrued Jurisdiction Claims
Industrial Law Termination of Employment Compensation Procedural Fairness Overtime Pay Annual Leave Accrued Jurisdiction Claims

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 5 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Barry John Lowe

Applicant

Profound Dairy Management Pty Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Industrial Law Termination of Employment / Decision After Undefended Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant's employment was terminated in contravention of Division III Part VIA of the Industrial Relations Act 1988
  2. 2 Whether the respondent discharged the burden of proof to show a valid reason for termination
  3. 3 Whether the applicant is entitled to compensation, damages, and other payments under the Act and accrued jurisdiction

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant's employment was terminated at the initiative of the respondent in breach of Division III Part VIA of the Industrial Relations Act 1988. The respondent did not discharge its burden of proof to show a valid reason for termination and denied the applicant procedural fairness. The applicant was entitled to compensation up to the statutory ceiling, damages in lieu of notice, and payment of accrued entitlements.

Court Disposition

Applicant successful; compensation, damages, and other entitlements awarded.

Orders

  • Declaration that respondent terminated applicant's employment in contravention of Division III Part VIA of the Industrial Relations Act 1988.
  • Respondent to pay compensation of $13,800.02 pursuant to s.170EE(3) Industrial Relations Act 1988.