Maric v Ericsson Australia Pty Ltd [2020] FCA 452

Maric v Ericsson Australia Pty Ltd [2020] FCA 452

None of the applicant's three alleged inquiries (as a prospective employee) were anchored in a legal entitlement of the kind required by s. 341(1)(c)(ii) of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth), and the statutory fiction in s. 341(3) did not overcome this. Therefore, the answer to the second preliminary question is 'No'.

Parties
Applicant: Dragica Maric; Respondent: Ericsson Australia Pty Ltd
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
09 April 2020
Procedural Posture
General Protections (industrial Law) Application / Preliminary Questions of Law (interlocutory Stage)
Outcome
Preliminary questions answered: (1) Not necessary to decide; (2) No. Matter referred to mediation. No order as to costs.
Legal Topics
General Protections, Workplace Rights, Adverse Action, Disability Discrimination, Reasonable Adjustments, Pre Contractual Negotiations
Employment & Industrial Relations General Protections Workplace Rights Adverse Action Disability Discrimination Reasonable Adjustments Pre Contractual Negotiations

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 18 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dragica Maric

Applicant

Ericsson Australia Pty Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

General Protections (industrial Law) Application / Preliminary Questions of Law (interlocutory Stage)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a prospective employee has a workplace right to make an inquiry within the meaning of s. 341(1)(c)(ii) of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth)
  2. 2 Whether the inquiries made during negotiations constituted exercise of a workplace right
  3. 3 Sources of entitlement for making inquiries under workplace law

Ratio Decidendi

None of the applicant's three alleged inquiries (as a prospective employee) were anchored in a legal entitlement of the kind required by s. 341(1)(c)(ii) of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth), and the statutory fiction in s. 341(3) did not overcome this. Therefore, the answer to the second preliminary question is 'No'.

Court Disposition

Preliminary questions answered: (1) Not necessary to decide; (2) No. Matter referred to mediation. No order as to costs.

Orders

  • Matter referred to mediation before a Registrar of the Federal Court on a date to be fixed.
  • No order as to costs.