King v State Bank of New South Wales (No 2) [2002] NSWIRComm 353

King v State Bank of New South Wales (No 2) [2002] NSWIRComm 353

The aggregation of notice and redundancy into one payment at first instance was erroneous; distinct compensation for redundancy beyond notice was warranted. Compensation for distress was within jurisdiction but the quantum awarded was excessive and should be reduced. The Commission's powers under s 106(5) permit compensation for distress where directly linked to unfairness found and just in the circumstances. The concessional interest rate for post-termination loans ought to have been extended for 12 months, reflecting respondent's unfair conduct. Appeals are not by way of new hearing but correction of error; the Full Bench must not merely substitute its view for that of the primary...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
23 December 2002
Procedural Posture
Appeal and Cross Appeal / Full Bench Decision After Leave to Appeal and Cross Appeal Granted
Outcome
Appeal and cross appeal upheld; orders varied
Legal Topics
['unfair Contract' 'termination of Employment' 'redundancy Pay' 'notice Period' 'monetary Compensation' 'distress Compensation']
['employment Law' 'industrial Law'] ['unfair Contract' 'termination of Employment' 'redundancy Pay' 'notice Period' 'monetary Compensation' 'distress Compensation']

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

Appeal and Cross Appeal / Full Bench Decision After Leave to Appeal and Cross Appeal Granted

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the contract of employment between Robert Gordon King and the State Bank of New South Wales was unfair within s 105 of the Industrial Relations Act 1996' 'Appropriate quantum and aggregation of notice and redundancy payments' 'Jurisdiction to order compensation for distress under s 106(5)' 'Assessment of loss of equity and concessional loan interest post termination' 'Nature and principles of appeal under Industrial Relations Act']

Ratio Decidendi

The aggregation of notice and redundancy into one payment at first instance was erroneous; distinct compensation for redundancy beyond notice was warranted. Compensation for distress was within jurisdiction but the quantum awarded was excessive and should be reduced. The Commission's powers under s 106(5) permit compensation for distress where directly linked to unfairness found and just in the circumstances. The concessional interest rate for post-termination loans ought to have been extended for 12 months, reflecting respondent's unfair conduct. Appeals are not by way of new hearing but correction of error; the Full Bench must not merely substitute its view for that of the primary...

Court Disposition

Appeal and cross appeal upheld; orders varied

Orders

  • ['Leave to appeal and leave to cross appeal granted' 'Order at first instance varied to allow further three months compensation for redundancy, calculated at same salary rate' 'Order at first instance varied to extend concessional interest rates on post-termination loans for 12 months' 'Order at first instance...