Toone v Markel Automotive [1996] IRCA 555

Toone v Markel Automotive [1996] IRCA 555

Because the applicant's contract always envisaged its operation under the state Act, and the relevant vocation was declared during its course, the applicant was entitled to the privileges and rights as an apprentice under state law at the relevant termination date, and was not excluded under regulation 30BA.

Parties
Applicant: MICHAEL TOONE; Respondent: MARKEL AUTOMOTIVE
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
12 November 1996
Procedural Posture
Application for Dismissal (notice of Motion) / Interlocutory Decision
Outcome
Notice of Motion dismissed
Legal Topics
Unlawful Termination, Employment Contract, Trainee or Apprentice Status, Jurisdictional Exclusion
Industrial Law Unlawful Termination Employment Contract Trainee or Apprentice Status Jurisdictional Exclusion

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 2 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

MICHAEL TOONE

Applicant

MARKEL AUTOMOTIVE

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application for Dismissal (notice of Motion) / Interlocutory Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant was a trainee or apprentice and thus excluded from the jurisdiction
  2. 2 Effect of agreement to train as apprentice when the relevant vocation was not proclaimed
  3. 3 Effect of subsequent proclamation of the vocation on parties' contract

Ratio Decidendi

Because the applicant's contract always envisaged its operation under the state Act, and the relevant vocation was declared during its course, the applicant was entitled to the privileges and rights as an apprentice under state law at the relevant termination date, and was not excluded under regulation 30BA.

Court Disposition

Notice of Motion dismissed

Orders

  • Notice of Motion for dismissal is dismissed