JACKSON v ELMERSIDE Pty Ltd [1997] IRCA 27

JACKSON v ELMERSIDE Pty Ltd [1997] IRCA 27

Although the respondent's intended recruitment of a General Manager would have demoted the applicant and there was no contractual term authorising such a demotion, the respondent did not intend to end the applicant's employment and expressly said it was not terminating him. The applicant was to remain employed as...

Source-derived case information.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
03 February 1997
Procedural Posture
Application Under Section 170 EA of the Then Industrial Relations Act 1988, Now Known as the Workplace Relations Act 1996, for Compensation for Alleged Unlawful Termination of Employment / Reasons for Decision After Hearing and Written Submissions
Outcome
Application dismissed.
Legal Topics
['termination of Employment' 'unlawful Termination' 'demotion' 'repudiation of Contract' 'termination at the Initiative of the Employer']
['industrial Law' 'employment Law'] ['termination of Employment' 'unlawful Termination' 'demotion' 'repudiation of Contract' 'termination at the Initiative of the Employer']

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 Section 170 EA of the Then Industrial Relations Act 1988, Now Known as the Workplace Relations Act 1996, for Compensation for Alleged Unlawful Termination of Employment / Reasons for Decision After Hearing and Written Submissions

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the applicant's employment was terminated at the initiative of the employer for the purposes of Section 170EA of the Act." 'Whether an intended demotion or repudiatory breach of the employment contract necessarily constituted termination at the initiative of the employer.' "Whether the applicant's departure was the probable result of the respondent's disclosure that it intended to recruit a General Manager."]

Ratio Decidendi

Although the respondent's intended recruitment of a General Manager would have demoted the applicant and there was no contractual term authorising such a demotion, the respondent did not intend to end the applicant's employment and expressly said it was not terminating him. The applicant was to remain employed as second in command on the same salary and entitlements, and in the circumstances his departure was not the probable result of the respondent's conduct. There was therefore no termination at the initiative of the employer, so the Act had no application.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed.

Orders

  • ['The application is dismissed.']