Adcock v Blackmores Ltd [2016] FCA 893

Adcock v Blackmores Ltd [2016] FCA 893

The abolition of a position does not by itself constitute termination of employment for the purpose of redundancy under the Enterprise Agreement; it is not the act of Blackmores but Mr Adcock's actions that terminated his employment. Leave to raise breach of contract arguments based on repudiation was refused as they were not previously advanced. Misrepresentation claims under s 345 Fair Work Act failed as there was no knowing or reckless conduct and Mr Adcock did not rely on the representations. The costs order was justified, having regard to appellant's unreasonable refusal to accept a compromise and the discretion was properly exercised.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
05 August 2016
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
['redundancy' 'repudiation of Contract' 'enterprise Agreement' 'misrepresentation' 'redundancy Pay' 'costs' 'practice and Procedure']
['industrial Law' 'employment Law' 'contract Law'] ['redundancy' 'repudiation of Contract' 'enterprise Agreement' 'misrepresentation' 'redundancy Pay' 'costs' 'practice and Procedure']

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

Appeal / Judgment on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether abolition of a position constituted termination for purposes of redundancy under the Blackmores Enterprise Agreement' "Whether employer's conduct amounted to repudiation of contract allowing employee to accept repudiation" 'Whether misrepresentations regarding redundancy and notice pay resulted in contravention of Fair Work Act s 345' 'Whether leave should be granted to raise breach of contract arguments on appeal' 'Whether the costs order was in error']

Ratio Decidendi

The abolition of a position does not by itself constitute termination of employment for the purpose of redundancy under the Enterprise Agreement; it is not the act of Blackmores but Mr Adcock's actions that terminated his employment. Leave to raise breach of contract arguments based on repudiation was refused as they were not previously advanced. Misrepresentation claims under s 345 Fair Work Act failed as there was no knowing or reckless conduct and Mr Adcock did not rely on the representations. The costs order was justified, having regard to appellant's unreasonable refusal to accept a compromise and the discretion was properly exercised.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • ['The appeal is dismissed.' 'The Appellant is to pay the costs of the Respondents.']