Melide, Ruben v Rethmann Australia Environmental Services Pty Ltd [1997] FCA 764

Melide, Ruben v Rethmann Australia Environmental Services Pty Ltd [1997] FCA 764

The onus of proving that an employee's employment was terminated at the initiative of the employer rests with the applicant; s 170EDA(2) of the Workplace Relations Act 1996 does not reverse this onus in cases where a breach of s 170DF is alleged.

Parties
Appellant: Ruben Melide; Respondent: Rethmann Australia Environmental Services Pty Limited
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
13 August 1997
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From Single Judge of the Industrial Relations Court of Australia
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Unlawful Termination, Onus of Proof, Workplace Relations Act 1996
Industrial Law Unlawful Termination Onus of Proof Workplace 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 2 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ruben Melide

Appellant

Rethmann Australia Environmental Services Pty Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From Single Judge of the Industrial Relations Court of Australia

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the employer bore the onus of proving termination was not at its initiative where the employee alleged a breach of s170DF of the Workplace Relations Act 1996

Ratio Decidendi

The onus of proving that an employee's employment was terminated at the initiative of the employer rests with the applicant; s 170EDA(2) of the Workplace Relations Act 1996 does not reverse this onus in cases where a breach of s 170DF is alleged.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed