Bolden v Smith Reid Training Group & O'Keefe v Smith Reid Training Group & Porter v Smith Reid Training Group [1997] IRCA 264

Bolden v Smith Reid Training Group & O'Keefe v Smith Reid Training Group & Porter v Smith Reid Training Group [1997] IRCA 264

The Applicants were not employees of the Respondent because the New Work Opportunities placement was a work experience and training program, the arrangements lacked the mutuality of obligation essential to a contract of service, and the Applicants were not performing work for the Respondent in a relationship of service. The applications therefore lacked jurisdiction and were dismissed. Although employment indicia existed, the proceedings were not instituted without reasonable cause, so costs were not ordered against the Applicants.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
11 September 1997
Procedural Posture
Industrial Law Applications for Reinstatement and Compensation for Alleged Unlawful Termination of Employment / Respondent's Notices of Motion to Strike Out the Applications for Want of Jurisdiction
Outcome
Applications dismissed for lack of jurisdiction; costs not awarded against the Applicants.
Legal Topics
['termination of Employment' 'unlawful Termination' 'labour Market Program' 'employment Relationship' 'contract of Service' 'jurisdiction' 'costs']
['industrial Law' 'employment Law'] ['termination of Employment' 'unlawful Termination' 'labour Market Program' 'employment Relationship' 'contract of Service' 'jurisdiction' 'costs']

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

Industrial Law Applications for Reinstatement and Compensation for Alleged Unlawful Termination of Employment / Respondent's Notices of Motion to Strike Out the Applications for Want of Jurisdiction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Applicants were employees of the Respondent for the purposes of their unlawful termination applications.' 'Whether the applications should be dismissed or struck out for want of jurisdiction.' 'Whether costs should be ordered against the Applicants on the basis that the proceedings were instituted without reasonable cause.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Applicants were not employees of the Respondent because the New Work Opportunities placement was a work experience and training program, the arrangements lacked the mutuality of obligation essential to a contract of service, and the Applicants were not performing work for the Respondent in a relationship of service. The applications therefore lacked jurisdiction and were dismissed. Although employment indicia existed, the proceedings were not instituted without reasonable cause, so costs were not ordered against the Applicants.

Court Disposition

Applications dismissed for lack of jurisdiction; costs not awarded against the Applicants.

Orders

  • ['The applications be dismissed.']