Wood v Dick Smith Electronics Pty Ltd; Rawas v Dick Smith Electronics Pty Ltd [2005] NSWIRComm 408
The removal of the DSE staff discount scheme and its replacement with the Woolworths scheme, in light of continued entitlement to a purchase scheme and the need for consistency across the organisation, did not objectively constitute unfairness for the purposes of s 106 of the Industrial Relations Act 1996; the staff discount scheme was not a contractual entitlement.
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 18 November 2005
- Procedural Posture
- Application Under S 106 of the Industrial Relations Act 1996 / Judgment
- Outcome
- application dismissed
- Legal Topics
- ['unfair Contract' 'employee Benefits' 'variation of Employment Terms']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Application Under S 106 of the Industrial Relations Act 1996 / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 ['Whether removal of the Dick Smith Electronics staff discount scheme and replacement with the Woolworths scheme constituted unfair conduct under s 106 of the Industrial Relations Act 1996' 'Whether the staff discount scheme was a contractual entitlement or merely a privilege']
Ratio Decidendi
The removal of the DSE staff discount scheme and its replacement with the Woolworths scheme, in light of continued entitlement to a purchase scheme and the need for consistency across the organisation, did not objectively constitute unfairness for the purposes of s 106 of the Industrial Relations Act 1996; the staff discount scheme was not a contractual entitlement.
Court Disposition
application dismissed
Orders
- ['The summons in each case is dismissed.']
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment