David John Henderson v Strapp Motors Pty Ltd [1995] IRCA 413

David John Henderson v Strapp Motors Pty Ltd [1995] IRCA 413

The applicant was employed as the respondent's valuer. The respondent terminated his employment at its initiative when it replaced him as valuer and offered only alternative employment as a salesman, which was a fundamental change to the nature of his employment. The termination was without valid reason because it resulted from the new dealer principal's preference to employ a new team, not from the applicant's conduct or capacity or any operational requirement. Compensation of $5,800.00 was therefore appropriate.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
23 August 1995
Procedural Posture
Application Pursuant to S170 EA of the Industrial Relations Act 1988 Seeking Compensation for Termination of Employment / Reasons for Decision After Hearing
Outcome
Application allowed; compensation ordered for the applicant.
Legal Topics
['termination of Employment' 'valid Reason for Termination' 'compensation' 'fundamental Change to Employment Duties']
['industrial Relations' 'employment Law'] ['termination of Employment' 'valid Reason for Termination' 'compensation' 'fundamental Change to Employment Duties']

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 Pursuant to S170 EA of the Industrial Relations Act 1988 Seeking Compensation for Termination of Employment / Reasons for Decision After Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the applicant was employed as the respondent's valuer rather than in a lesser skilled assessor role" "Whether the respondent terminated the applicant's employment at the initiative of the employer by informing him he was no longer employed as valuer and offering alternative employment as salesman" 'Whether the termination occurred without valid reason under S170DE(1)' 'What compensation should be awarded under S170EE']

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant was employed as the respondent's valuer. The respondent terminated his employment at its initiative when it replaced him as valuer and offered only alternative employment as a salesman, which was a fundamental change to the nature of his employment. The termination was without valid reason because it resulted from the new dealer principal's preference to employ a new team, not from the applicant's conduct or capacity or any operational requirement. Compensation of $5,800.00 was therefore appropriate.

Court Disposition

Application allowed; compensation ordered for the applicant.

Orders

  • ['That the respondent pay to the applicant compensation in the sum of $5,800.00.' 'That payment be made within 21 days of the date of this order.']