Marks v University of Melbourne [1999] FCA 150

Marks v University of Melbourne [1999] FCA 150

The termination of the applicant's contract of employment occurred at the initiative of the University, as the University exercised its contractual option to terminate following CCH's withdrawal of funding. Accordingly, both preliminary questions are answered in the affirmative.

Parties
Applicant: Bernard Marks; Respondent: University of Melbourne
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
24 February 1999
Procedural Posture
Employment / Industrial Relations / Determination of Preliminary Questions Before Further Trial
Outcome
Questions answered: Yes to both; directions hearing ordered.
Legal Topics
Termination of Employment, Employment Contracts, Termination at the Initiative of the Employer, Statutory and Award Conditions of Employment
Employment Law Industrial Law Termination of Employment Employment Contracts Termination at the Initiative of the Employer Statutory and Award Conditions of 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 4 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Bernard Marks

Applicant

University of Melbourne

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment / Industrial Relations / Determination of Preliminary Questions Before Further Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there was a contract of employment between the applicant and the respondent on or around 15 August 1996
  2. 2 Whether the contract of employment was terminated at the initiative of the respondent

Ratio Decidendi

The termination of the applicant's contract of employment occurred at the initiative of the University, as the University exercised its contractual option to terminate following CCH's withdrawal of funding. Accordingly, both preliminary questions are answered in the affirmative.

Court Disposition

Questions answered: Yes to both; directions hearing ordered.

Orders

  • The question whether on or around 15 August 1996, the Applicant and the Respondent were parties to a contract of employment between them is answered Yes.
  • If yes to (a), whether the contract of employment between the Applicant and the Respondent was terminated as a result of a decision taken by, or otherwise at the initiative of, the Respondent is answered Yes.