Twomey v Que 5 Pty Ltd [2023] FCA 1155

Twomey v Que 5 Pty Ltd [2023] FCA 1155

The applicant did not meet the minimum employment period to be protected from unfair dismissal under the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth); the Fair Work Commission and its Full Bench committed no jurisdictional error in dismissing his claim and refusing permission to appeal; no denial of procedural fairness or other legal...

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Applicant: Rhys Junior Huirao Twomey; First Respondent: Que 5 Pty Ltd (ACN 109 339 924); Second Respondent: Fair Work Commission
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
27 September 2023
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review Application / Final Judgment in Federal Court
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Judicial Review, Unfair Dismissal, Minimum Employment Period, Small Business Employer, Permission to Appeal
Industrial Law Employment Law Judicial Review Unfair Dismissal Minimum Employment Period Small Business Employer Permission to Appeal

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 5 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Rhys Junior Huirao Twomey

Applicant

Que 5 Pty Ltd (ACN 109 339 924)

First Respondent

Fair Work Commission

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review Application / Final Judgment in Federal Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Fair Work Commission Full Bench committed jurisdictional error in refusing permission to appeal
  2. 2 Whether applicant was protected from unfair dismissal under Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth)
  3. 3 Whether denial of procedural fairness occurred regarding conciliation process and evidence considered

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant did not meet the minimum employment period to be protected from unfair dismissal under the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth); the Fair Work Commission and its Full Bench committed no jurisdictional error in dismissing his claim and refusing permission to appeal; no denial of procedural fairness or other legal error was established.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • The application is dismissed.
  • By 4.00 pm on 11 October 2023, the first respondent must file and serve any submissions on the costs of the proceeding, of not more than three pages in length.