Towers v Manning [2001] NSWIRComm 108

Towers v Manning [2001] NSWIRComm 108

Repeated expressions of intention to leave, agreement to depart upon the appointment of a replacement, and lack of protest at the termination constituted effective resignation by the applicant; accordingly, the application for relief from unfair dismissal was refused.

Parties
Applicant: Wayne Towers; Respondent: Rodney Manning
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
22 May 2001
Procedural Posture
Application for Relief From Unfair Dismissal / Decision
Outcome
Application for relief refused
Legal Topics
Unfair Dismissal, Resignation, Termination of Employment
Industrial Relations Unfair Dismissal Resignation Termination of Employment

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 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Wayne Towers

Applicant

Rodney Manning

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application for Relief From Unfair Dismissal / Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the termination of employment by the respondent was harsh, unreasonable or unjust under s84 of the Industrial Relations Act 1996
  2. 2 Whether the applicant resigned or was dismissed

Ratio Decidendi

Repeated expressions of intention to leave, agreement to depart upon the appointment of a replacement, and lack of protest at the termination constituted effective resignation by the applicant; accordingly, the application for relief from unfair dismissal was refused.

Court Disposition

Application for relief refused

Orders

  • The application for relief is refused.
  • Matter No IRC 2526 of 2000 is so concluded.