Paula Lee v Ausgrid (formerly Energy Australia) [2012] NSWIRComm 1027

Paula Lee v Ausgrid (formerly Energy Australia) [2012] NSWIRComm 1027

Although the complaint made by Ms Lee played a part in the redeployment decision, the Commission was not satisfied that it was a substantial and operative cause of that decision; the employer successfully rebutted the statutory presumption of victimisation under s 210(2) of the Industrial Relations Act 1996. Accordingly, no relief was granted and the claim was dismissed.

Parties
Applicant: Paula Lee; Respondent: Ausgrid (formerly Energy Australia)
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
21 December 2012
Procedural Posture
Victimisation; Industrial Dispute / Final Decision After Remittal From Full Bench Appeal
Outcome
Claim dismissed; respondent rebutted presumption of victimisation
Legal Topics
Victimisation, Redeployment, Workplace Bullying, Reverse Onus, Rebuttal Presumption, Remedies Under Industrial Relations Act 1996
Industrial Relations Employment Law Victimisation Redeployment Workplace Bullying Reverse Onus Rebuttal Presumption Remedies Under Industrial Relations Act 1996

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 4 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Paula Lee

Applicant

Ausgrid (formerly Energy Australia)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Victimisation; Industrial Dispute / Final Decision After Remittal From Full Bench Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Has the respondent rebutted the presumption under s 210(2) of the Industrial Relations Act 1996 that the applicant was victimised as a result of making a workplace complaint?
  2. 2 If not rebutted, what remedy or order should be made for the applicant?

Ratio Decidendi

Although the complaint made by Ms Lee played a part in the redeployment decision, the Commission was not satisfied that it was a substantial and operative cause of that decision; the employer successfully rebutted the statutory presumption of victimisation under s 210(2) of the Industrial Relations Act 1996. Accordingly, no relief was granted and the claim was dismissed.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed; respondent rebutted presumption of victimisation

Orders

  • Matter No. IRC 1371 of 2009 concluded by dismissal of the claim.