Kenneth McKay v Astam Books [1995] IRCA 154

Kenneth McKay v Astam Books [1995] IRCA 154

Although the respondent established an underlying valid reason for termination based on the applicant's failure to process return authorisations promptly and to inform management of that failure, the respondent breached section 170DC by not making clear before the final termination interview that the applicant's employment was in jeopardy and by not putting the customer complaints allegation to him. Those procedural failures denied natural justice, made the termination unjust under section 170DE(2), and warranted compensation for lost wages and holiday pay during the period of unemployment.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
23 March 1995
Procedural Posture
Application Under Section 170 EA of the Industrial Relations Act 1988 for Compensation for Termination of Employment / Reasons for Judgment
Outcome
Application allowed; compensation awarded to the applicant for unlawful termination of employment.
Legal Topics
['termination of Employment' 'valid Reason for Termination' 'procedural Fairness' 'compensation']
['industrial Relations' 'employment Law'] ['termination of Employment' 'valid Reason for Termination' 'procedural Fairness' '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

Application Under Section 170 EA of the Industrial Relations Act 1988 for Compensation for Termination of Employment / Reasons for Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the termination of the applicant's employment was a breach of section 170DE of the Industrial Relations Act 1988." "Whether the way in which the applicant's employment was terminated was a breach of section 170DC of the Industrial Relations Act 1988." 'Whether the termination was harsh, unjust or unreasonable within section 170DE(2) of the Industrial Relations Act 1988.' 'What amount of compensation should be awarded for the unlawful termination of employment.']

Ratio Decidendi

Although the respondent established an underlying valid reason for termination based on the applicant's failure to process return authorisations promptly and to inform management of that failure, the respondent breached section 170DC by not making clear before the final termination interview that the applicant's employment was in jeopardy and by not putting the customer complaints allegation to him. Those procedural failures denied natural justice, made the termination unjust under section 170DE(2), and warranted compensation for lost wages and holiday pay during the period of unemployment.

Court Disposition

Application allowed; compensation awarded to the applicant for unlawful termination of employment.

Orders

  • ['The respondent is to pay the applicant the sum of $3,228.45 by way of compensation for the unlawful termination of his employment within 21 days of today.']