Jerzy Slezak v Pilkington (Aust) Operations Ltd [1995] IRCA 638

Jerzy Slezak v Pilkington (Aust) Operations Ltd [1995] IRCA 638

The respondent failed to discharge the onus under ss170EDA(2) because, on the whole of the evidence, the Court was not satisfied on the balance of probabilities that the applicant's extended absence from work because of injury and inability to perform certain process work was not included as a reason for termination. The respondent also failed to establish a valid reason for termination, including that the 1993 offers were work the applicant could reasonably perform, that suitable modified duties were unavailable, or that all reasonable and practicable steps had been taken to return him to normal duties. The Court therefore found contraventions of ss170DF(1)(a), 170DE(1), 170DE(2) and...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
01 December 1995
Procedural Posture
Claim of Unlawful Termination of Employment / Trial; Reasons for Judgment After Findings of Contraventions and Orders for Reinstatement
Outcome
Application upheld; contraventions found and reinstatement ordered.
Legal Topics
['unlawful Termination' 'termination Because of Temporary Absence From Work Because of Illness or Injury' 'rehabilitation of Injured Worker' 'modified Duties' 'valid Reason for Termination' 'harsh, Unjust and Unreasonable Termination' 'reinstatement' 'onus of Proof']
['industrial Law' 'employment Law'] ['unlawful Termination' 'termination Because of Temporary Absence From Work Because of Illness or Injury' 'rehabilitation of Injured Worker' 'modified Duties' 'valid Reason for Termination' 'harsh, Unjust and Unreasonable Termination' 'reinstatement' 'onus of Proof']

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

Claim of Unlawful Termination of Employment / Trial; Reasons for Judgment After Findings of Contraventions and Orders for Reinstatement

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the respondent terminated the applicant's employment for reasons that included his temporary absence from work because of injury." "Whether the respondent established a valid reason for termination associated with the applicant's capacity or operational requirements." 'Whether the applicant failed to comply with reasonable directions to return to normal duties under a structured rehabilitation program.' 'Whether the respondent was unable to provide suitable alternative duties and had taken all reasonable and practicable steps to return the applicant to normal duties.' 'Whether reinstatement was impracticable.']

Ratio Decidendi

The respondent failed to discharge the onus under ss170EDA(2) because, on the whole of the evidence, the Court was not satisfied on the balance of probabilities that the applicant's extended absence from work because of injury and inability to perform certain process work was not included as a reason for termination. The respondent also failed to establish a valid reason for termination, including that the 1993 offers were work the applicant could reasonably perform, that suitable modified duties were unavailable, or that all reasonable and practicable steps had been taken to return him to normal duties. The Court therefore found contraventions of ss170DF(1)(a), 170DE(1), 170DE(2) and...

Court Disposition

Application upheld; contraventions found and reinstatement ordered.

Orders

  • ['The employer reinstate the employee Jerzy Slezak to either the position in which he was employed immediately before termination or to another position on terms and conditions no less favourable to those on which the employee was employed immediately before termination.' "All steps necessary are to be taken to...