Visscher v The Australian Industrial Relations Commission [2007] FCAFC 206

Visscher v The Australian Industrial Relations Commission [2007] FCAFC 206

Teekay's 2001 rescission of Mr Visscher's promotion was a breach of contract but was legally effective to end his employment as a permanent Chief Officer. His subsequent continued employment did not preserve a permanent Chief Officer employment relationship, and the 2001 Certified Agreement provided an additional basis for rejecting any inconsistent contractual claim. Accordingly, in 2004 he was not employed as a permanent Chief Officer, the asserted jurisdictional fact for AIRC jurisdiction was not made out, Commissioner Redmond made no jurisdictional error, and there was no independent jurisdictional error by the Full Bench.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
21 December 2007
Procedural Posture
Amended Application for an Order to Show Cause Remitted From the High Court of Australia; Application for Constitutional Writs Challenging Decisions of the Australian Industrial Relations Commission / Full Court of the Federal Court of Australia, Judgment After Hearing
Outcome
The proceedings were dismissed.
Legal Topics
['contract of Employment' 'wrongful Termination of Employment' 'termination at the Initiative of the Employer' 'jurisdictional Fact' 'jurisdictional Error' 'constitutional Writs' 'certified Agreements' 'demotion']
['employment Law' 'industrial Relations' 'administrative Law' 'constitutional Law'] ['contract of Employment' 'wrongful Termination of Employment' 'termination at the Initiative of the Employer' 'jurisdictional Fact' 'jurisdictional Error' 'constitutional Writs' 'certified Agreements' 'demotion']

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

Amended Application for an Order to Show Cause Remitted From the High Court of Australia; Application for Constitutional Writs Challenging Decisions of the Australian Industrial Relations Commission / Full Court of the Federal Court of Australia, Judgment After Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the AIRC's jurisdiction under s 170CE of the Workplace Relations Act 1996 (Cth) was enlivened by a termination of Mr Visscher's employment at the initiative of Teekay." 'Whether Commissioner Redmond and the Full Bench of the AIRC made jurisdictional errors by failing to find the continuing existence in 2004 of a contract of employment as permanent Chief Officer.' "Whether Teekay's 2001 rescission of Mr Visscher's promotion to permanent Chief Officer, although wrongful, effectively ended his employment as a permanent Chief Officer." 'Whether the 2001 Certified Agreement subordinated any inconsistent contractual position asserted by Mr Visscher.']

Ratio Decidendi

Teekay's 2001 rescission of Mr Visscher's promotion was a breach of contract but was legally effective to end his employment as a permanent Chief Officer. His subsequent continued employment did not preserve a permanent Chief Officer employment relationship, and the 2001 Certified Agreement provided an additional basis for rejecting any inconsistent contractual claim. Accordingly, in 2004 he was not employed as a permanent Chief Officer, the asserted jurisdictional fact for AIRC jurisdiction was not made out, Commissioner Redmond made no jurisdictional error, and there was no independent jurisdictional error by the Full Bench.

Court Disposition

The proceedings were dismissed.

Orders

  • ['The proceedings are dismissed.']