Stephen Place v Techforce Pty Ltd [1995] IRCA 288

Stephen Place v Techforce Pty Ltd [1995] IRCA 288

The evidence showed that the relationship between the applicant and the respondent was casual, including the employment application form and the applicant's own understanding; because the applicant did not fall within the category of casual employees excepted from Regulation 30B(1)(d), the application failed.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
29 June 1995
Procedural Posture
Application Pursuant to Section 170 EA of the Industrial Relations Act / Reasons for Judgment and Orders
Outcome
Application dismissed.
Legal Topics
['termination of Employment' 'casual Employee' 'unlawful Termination']
['industrial Law'] ['termination of Employment' 'casual Employee' 'unlawful Termination']

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 / Reasons for Judgment and Orders

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the applicant's employment was terminated unlawfully." 'Whether the applicant was a casual employee excluded from pursuing an unlawful termination claim by Regulation 30B(1)(d).']

Ratio Decidendi

The evidence showed that the relationship between the applicant and the respondent was casual, including the employment application form and the applicant's own understanding; because the applicant did not fall within the category of casual employees excepted from Regulation 30B(1)(d), the application failed.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed.

Orders

  • ['The Application is dismissed.']