Trevena v Thiess Pty Ltd [2016] FCA 468

Trevena v Thiess Pty Ltd [2016] FCA 468

Although Mr Trevena's complaint about Mr Jones was a complaint made in relation to his employment and nothing turned on the fact that it was made on his behalf by his brother, Thiess did not take adverse action within s 340 because no casual shifts were unlawfully withheld, the Quality Control Co-ordinator position did not exist and was not offered, there was no manifested intention to terminate, and the letter of 16 December 2013 did not dismiss him. Thiess also did not take or threaten action with intent to coerce Mr Trevena not to exercise a workplace right, and no Thiess employee made the alleged false promise of a Quality Control Co-ordinator role so as to contravene ss 18 or 31 of...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
10 May 2016
Procedural Posture
Industrial Law Proceeding Alleging Contraventions of the Fair Work Act 2009 (cth) and the Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (cth) / Final Judgment After Hearing
Outcome
Application dismissed.
Legal Topics
['general Protections' 'workplace Rights' 'adverse Action' 'coercion' 'misleading or Deceptive Conduct' 'employment Representations']
['industrial Law' 'employment Law' 'consumer Law'] ['general Protections' 'workplace Rights' 'adverse Action' 'coercion' 'misleading or Deceptive Conduct' 'employment Representations']

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

Industrial Law Proceeding Alleging Contraventions of the Fair Work Act 2009 (cth) and the Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (cth) / Final Judgment After Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether Mr Trevena exercised a workplace right by making, or having made on his behalf, a complaint or inquiry in relation to his employment about Mr Jones's conduct on 27 September 2013." 'Whether Thiess took adverse action against Mr Trevena by failing to offer casual shifts, failing to appoint him as Quality Control Co-ordinator, manifesting an intention to terminate his employment, or dismissing him.' "Whether any adverse action was taken because of Mr Trevena's exercise of a workplace right." 'Whether Thiess took or threatened action with intent to coerce Mr Trevena not to challenge the findings of the investigation into the incident with Mr Jones.' 'Whether Thiess engaged in misleading or deceptive conduct, or conduct liable to mislead persons seeking employment, by falsely promising Mr Trevena the role of Quality Control Co-ordinator.']

Ratio Decidendi

Although Mr Trevena's complaint about Mr Jones was a complaint made in relation to his employment and nothing turned on the fact that it was made on his behalf by his brother, Thiess did not take adverse action within s 340 because no casual shifts were unlawfully withheld, the Quality Control Co-ordinator position did not exist and was not offered, there was no manifested intention to terminate, and the letter of 16 December 2013 did not dismiss him. Thiess also did not take or threaten action with intent to coerce Mr Trevena not to exercise a workplace right, and no Thiess employee made the alleged false promise of a Quality Control Co-ordinator role so as to contravene ss 18 or 31 of...

Court Disposition

Application dismissed.

Orders

  • ['The application be dismissed.']