Lane v Centeq Pty Ltd [1996] IRCA 121

The applicant voluntarily resigned; there was no termination at the initiative of the employer. Therefore, the court lacks jurisdiction under s170EA of the Industrial Relations Act 1988.

Jurisdiction: Australia
Judgment Date: 02 April 1996
Procedural Posture: Application (industrial) / Jurisdictional Hearing; Summary Dismissal
Outcome: Application dismissed; court lacks jurisdiction
Legal Topics: ['unlawful Termination' 'jurisdiction' 'resignation Vs Dismissal']

['industrial Law'] ['unlawful Termination' 'jurisdiction' 'resignation Vs Dismissal']

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

Procedural Posture

Application (industrial) / Jurisdictional Hearing; Summary Dismissal

Legal Issues

1 ['Whether the termination of employment occurred at the initiative of the employer or the employee' 'Whether the Court has jurisdiction under s170EA of the Industrial Relations Act 1988']

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant voluntarily resigned; there was no termination at the initiative of the employer. Therefore, the court lacks jurisdiction under s170EA of the Industrial Relations Act 1988.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed; court lacks jurisdiction

Orders

['The application is dismissed.']