Li v Edith Cowan University [2016] FCA 380

Li v Edith Cowan University [2016] FCA 380

The applicant had no reasonable prospect of successfully prosecuting any claim. It was not arguable that the Full Bench constructively failed to exercise jurisdiction in refusing permission to appeal. The contractual entitlements claim depended on implying a term from the Code that would contradict cl 21 of the Collective Agreement. The miscellaneous contractual claims and CrimeNet publication claims would be barred by the Deed of Settlement and Release. Summary judgment of dismissal was therefore appropriate.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
19 April 2016
Procedural Posture
Federal Court Proceeding Seeking Judicial Review Relief and Damages Arising Out of Unfair Dismissal and Related Employment Claims / First Respondent's Application for Summary Judgment; Further Amended Originating Application Dismissed
Outcome
Summary judgment for the first respondent; further amended originating application dismissed.
Legal Topics
['summary Judgment' 'unfair Dismissal' 'judicial Review of Fair Work Commission Appeal Decision' 'no Reasonable Prospect of Success' 'implied Contractual Terms' 'deed of Settlement and Release' 'reinstatement and Compensation']
['administrative and Constitutional Law and Human Rights' 'employment Law' 'contract Law' 'civil Procedure'] ['summary Judgment' 'unfair Dismissal' 'judicial Review of Fair Work Commission Appeal Decision' 'no Reasonable Prospect of Success' 'implied Contractual Terms' 'deed of Settlement and Release' 'reinstatement and Compensation']

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

Federal Court Proceeding Seeking Judicial Review Relief and Damages Arising Out of Unfair Dismissal and Related Employment Claims / First Respondent's Application for Summary Judgment; Further Amended Originating Application Dismissed

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the applicant had no reasonable prospect of successfully prosecuting the proceeding or part of it under s 31A(2) of the Federal Court Act 1976 (Cth) and r 26.01 of the Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth).' 'Whether the Full Bench of the Fair Work Commission constructively failed to exercise jurisdiction in refusing permission to appeal under s 400(1) of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth).' 'Whether the applicant could pursue contractual entitlement claims based on an implied term requiring compliance with the Australian Code for the Responsible Conduct of Research.' 'Whether miscellaneous contractual claims and CrimeNet publication claims were barred by the Deed of Settlement and Release.']

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant had no reasonable prospect of successfully prosecuting any claim. It was not arguable that the Full Bench constructively failed to exercise jurisdiction in refusing permission to appeal. The contractual entitlements claim depended on implying a term from the Code that would contradict cl 21 of the Collective Agreement. The miscellaneous contractual claims and CrimeNet publication claims would be barred by the Deed of Settlement and Release. Summary judgment of dismissal was therefore appropriate.

Court Disposition

Summary judgment for the first respondent; further amended originating application dismissed.

Orders

  • ['The further amended originating application be dismissed.' 'The parties have liberty, within 14 days of this order, to apply to the Court on the question of costs.']