Reynolds v Bunnings Warehouse [2006] FCA 333

Reynolds v Bunnings Warehouse [2006] FCA 333

The applicant’s claim under s 170CK failed as the evidence showed he was not a union member at the time of dismissal and s 170CK does not prohibit dismissal for applying to join a union; his claim under s 170CM was struck out as he had been paid in lieu of notice.

Parties
Applicant: David Reynolds; Respondent: Bunnings Warehouse
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
20 March 2006
Procedural Posture
Application (employment/workplace Relations) / Summary Judgment Motion
Outcome
Claim under s 170CK dismissed; claim under s 170CM struck out
Legal Topics
Unlawful Termination, Trade Union Membership, Summary Judgment
Employment Law Unlawful Termination Trade Union Membership Summary Judgment

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 3 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

David Reynolds

Applicant

Bunnings Warehouse

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application (employment/workplace Relations) / Summary Judgment Motion

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether applicant’s termination was unlawful under s 170CK of the Workplace Relations Act 1996 (Cth)
  2. 2 Whether failure to pay applicant in lieu of notice contravened s 170CM of the Workplace Relations Act 1996 (Cth)
  3. 3 Whether applying to join a union is a prohibited ground for dismissal under s 170CK

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant’s claim under s 170CK failed as the evidence showed he was not a union member at the time of dismissal and s 170CK does not prohibit dismissal for applying to join a union; his claim under s 170CM was struck out as he had been paid in lieu of notice.

Court Disposition

Claim under s 170CK dismissed; claim under s 170CM struck out

Orders

  • Insofar as the application relied on s 170CK of the Workplace Relations Act 1996 (Cth), the application is dismissed on the ground that no reasonable cause of action is disclosed.
  • Insofar as the application relied on s 170CM of the Workplace Relations Act 1996 (Cth), the application is struck out.