Louis Kyriacou v T & A Winter Enterprises Pty Ltd [1995] IRCA 396

Louis Kyriacou v T & A Winter Enterprises Pty Ltd [1995] IRCA 396

In light of the guilty pleas and the defendant's undertaking to contribute $2,500.00 towards the prosecutor's legal expenses, no penalty was imposed for the Regulation 132A and 131A record-keeping offences. The dismissal offence under s334 was a serious and blatant breach concerning union membership, but a fine of $500.00 was imposed rather than the maximum because of the costs contribution indicating repentance, the prosecutor's position that the maximum penalty was not sought, and the absence of alleged prior convictions.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
17 August 1995
Procedural Posture
Prosecutions Under the Industrial Relations Act 1988 and the Industrial Relations Regulations / Penalty After Guilty Plea
Outcome
Defendant convicted on three offences; no penalty imposed for the two Industrial Relations Regulations offences; fined $500.00 for the s334 Industrial Relations Act 1988 offence with a stay of 30 days for payment.
Legal Topics
['union Membership' 'dismissal of Employee' 'prosecution Against Employer' 'penalty' 'employment Records' 'pay Slips']
['industrial Law'] ['union Membership' 'dismissal of Employee' 'prosecution Against Employer' 'penalty' 'employment Records' 'pay Slips']

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

Prosecutions Under the Industrial Relations Act 1988 and the Industrial Relations Regulations / Penalty After Guilty Plea

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether penalties should be imposed for offences against Regulations 132A and 131A of the Industrial Relations Regulations concerning pay slip and record-keeping failures.' 'What penalty should be imposed for an offence against s334 of the Industrial Relations Act 1988 where the defendant dismissed an employee because of union membership and dissatisfaction with conditions.']

Ratio Decidendi

In light of the guilty pleas and the defendant's undertaking to contribute $2,500.00 towards the prosecutor's legal expenses, no penalty was imposed for the Regulation 132A and 131A record-keeping offences. The dismissal offence under s334 was a serious and blatant breach concerning union membership, but a fine of $500.00 was imposed rather than the maximum because of the costs contribution indicating repentance, the prosecutor's position that the maximum penalty was not sought, and the absence of alleged prior convictions.

Court Disposition

Defendant convicted on three offences; no penalty imposed for the two Industrial Relations Regulations offences; fined $500.00 for the s334 Industrial Relations Act 1988 offence with a stay of 30 days for payment.

Orders

  • ['The defendant, T & A Winter Enterprises Pty Ltd, is convicted of an offence against Regulation 132A of the Industrial Relations Regulations for failing to issue Peter Soxsmith with a written pay slip relating to payment for work performed on 13 November 1993 within one day of payment.' 'The defendant, T & A Winter...