Richard William Dalgleish v Hedland College [1995] IRCA 282

Richard William Dalgleish v Hedland College [1995] IRCA 282

The stated reasons for terminating the applicant's employment were not valid: the failure to submit Treasury forms was not shown to have caused adverse consequences and the uncontradicted evidence was that it improved the college's position; dismissal before the grievances document could be put before council was grossly unfair; and other matters either had been resolved or did not warrant termination. The respondent also failed to discuss the allegations with the applicant, breaching section 170DC. The termination was harsh, unjust and unreasonable and contravened the Industrial Relations Act. Reinstatement was impracticable because a new permanent finance manager had accepted...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
31 May 1995
Procedural Posture
Application Pursuant to Section 170 EA of the Industrial Relations Act Concerning Termination of Employment / Reasons for Decision Delivered Ex Tempore After Hearing
Outcome
Application upheld; termination found to have contravened the Industrial Relations Act; compensation awarded instead of reinstatement.
Legal Topics
['termination of Employment' 'harsh, Unjust and Unreasonable Termination' 'procedural Unfairness' 'reinstatement' 'compensation']
['industrial Law' 'employment Law'] ['termination of Employment' 'harsh, Unjust and Unreasonable Termination' 'procedural Unfairness' 'reinstatement' '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 Pursuant to Section 170 EA of the Industrial Relations Act Concerning Termination of Employment / Reasons for Decision Delivered Ex Tempore After Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the reasons given for the termination of the applicant's employment were valid reasons." 'Whether the respondent failed to discuss the allegations forming the reasons for termination with the applicant in breach of section 170DC of the Industrial Relations Act.' 'Whether reinstatement was practicable.' 'What compensation should be awarded if reinstatement was impracticable.']

Ratio Decidendi

The stated reasons for terminating the applicant's employment were not valid: the failure to submit Treasury forms was not shown to have caused adverse consequences and the uncontradicted evidence was that it improved the college's position; dismissal before the grievances document could be put before council was grossly unfair; and other matters either had been resolved or did not warrant termination. The respondent also failed to discuss the allegations with the applicant, breaching section 170DC. The termination was harsh, unjust and unreasonable and contravened the Industrial Relations Act. Reinstatement was impracticable because a new permanent finance manager had accepted...

Court Disposition

Application upheld; termination found to have contravened the Industrial Relations Act; compensation awarded instead of reinstatement.

Orders

  • ["The termination of the Applicant's employment contravened Part VIA Division 3 of the Industrial Relations Act." "The Respondent pay the Applicant $20,000 within 21 days of today's date."]