Cate Clunne v Nambucca Shire Council [1995] IRCA 355

Cate Clunne v Nambucca Shire Council [1995] IRCA 355

Because the respondent admitted that the applicant was dismissed without being given the opportunity required by s170DC to defend herself against the allegations, and reinstatement was impracticable, compensation under s170EE was appropriate. The Court found that, had the applicant not been dealt with peremptorily, dismissal was not inevitable or likely, and awarded the statutory maximum of six months' remuneration, $17,056, without discount for her conduct concerning Mr Arnett. The Court also held that the respondent's failure to follow the invoked dispute resolution procedure before termination meant the dismissal was not in accordance with the contract and constituted a breach and...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
08 August 1995
Procedural Posture
Application Under S170 EA of the Industrial Relations Act 1988 Seeking Remedy Under S170 Ee, With an Accrued Jurisdiction Claim for Breach of Contract / Reasons for Judgment and Orders After Hearing
Outcome
Application allowed in part; dismissal declared to contravene s170DC; compensation and damages awarded to the applicant.
Legal Topics
['termination of Employment' 'compensation for Contravention of S170 Dc' 'wrongful Dismissal' 'fixed Term Employment Contract' 'dispute Resolution Clause' 'damages for Psychiatric Illness' 'lost Opportunity for Further Employment']
['industrial Law' 'employment Contract' 'contract Law'] ['termination of Employment' 'compensation for Contravention of S170 Dc' 'wrongful Dismissal' 'fixed Term Employment Contract' 'dispute Resolution Clause' 'damages for Psychiatric Illness' 'lost Opportunity for Further 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 S170 EA of the Industrial Relations Act 1988 Seeking Remedy Under S170 Ee, With an Accrued Jurisdiction Claim for Breach of Contract / Reasons for Judgment and Orders After Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the dismissal of the applicant contravened s170DC of the Industrial Relations Act 1988 and what compensation should be awarded under s170EE.' 'Whether the respondent breached the employment contract by terminating employment without following the dispute resolution procedure in clause 16.' 'Whether damages were recoverable for loss of the opportunity to obtain further employment after expiry of the fixed term contract.' 'Whether damages were recoverable for psychiatric illness and associated distress caused by the breach of contract.']

Ratio Decidendi

Because the respondent admitted that the applicant was dismissed without being given the opportunity required by s170DC to defend herself against the allegations, and reinstatement was impracticable, compensation under s170EE was appropriate. The Court found that, had the applicant not been dealt with peremptorily, dismissal was not inevitable or likely, and awarded the statutory maximum of six months' remuneration, $17,056, without discount for her conduct concerning Mr Arnett. The Court also held that the respondent's failure to follow the invoked dispute resolution procedure before termination meant the dismissal was not in accordance with the contract and constituted a breach and...

Court Disposition

Application allowed in part; dismissal declared to contravene s170DC; compensation and damages awarded to the applicant.

Orders

  • ['Declares that the dismissal of the applicant was in contravention of s170DC of the Act.' 'The respondent pay the applicant compensation in the sum of $17,056.' 'Judgment for the applicant in the sum of $6,500.']