Jeffrey Roy Charles Morton v Truefeat Pty Limited and Others [1995] IRCA 266

Jeffrey Roy Charles Morton v Truefeat Pty Limited and Others [1995] IRCA 266

The applications are dismissed because (1) there is no evidence the applicant was employed by the respondent companies other than Truefeat Pty Limited; (2) applicant's salary exceeded the statutory threshold at the relevant time; (3) the termination of employment was not at the initiative of the employer; and (4)...

Source-derived case information.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
02 June 1995
Procedural Posture
Application Under Industrial Relations Act 1988 S170 EA / Ruling on Preliminary Matters; Application Dismissed
Outcome
Application dismissed.
Legal Topics
['termination of Employment' 'jurisdiction' 'identity of Employer' 'requirement for Leave to Proceed' 'deed of Arrangement']
['industrial Law' 'corporations Law'] ['termination of Employment' 'jurisdiction' 'identity of Employer' 'requirement for Leave to Proceed' 'deed of Arrangement']

Source-derived case record

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 Under Industrial Relations Act 1988 S170 EA / Ruling on Preliminary Matters; Application Dismissed

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Court has jurisdiction to hear the application for termination of employment' 'Whether applicant was employed by each of the respondents' 'Whether the termination was at the initiative of the employer' 'Whether leave required under section 444E(3) Corporations Act was obtained']

Ratio Decidendi

The applications are dismissed because (1) there is no evidence the applicant was employed by the respondent companies other than Truefeat Pty Limited; (2) applicant's salary exceeded the statutory threshold at the relevant time; (3) the termination of employment was not at the initiative of the employer; and (4) proceedings are barred by section 444E(3) of the Corporations Act, as a Deed of Arrangement is in place and leave has not been sought or granted.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed.

Orders

  • ['Each application is dismissed.']