Thompson, Melanie v Boyne Smelters Ltd [1998] FCA 123

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

INDUSTRIAL LAW - TERMINATION OF EMPLOYMENT - review of decision of judicial registrar - judicial registrar ordered reinstatement and compensation - orders quashed on review - whether employee was reinstated according to the terms of the judicial registrar's order - whether compensation should be repaid to the respondent employer Kondis v State Transport Authority (1984) 154 CLR 672 Perkins v Grace Worldwide (Aust) Pty Ltd (1997) 72 IR 186

MELANIE THOMPSON v BOYNE SMELTERS LTD QI 1036 of 1996 MADGWICK J SYDNEY (HEARD IN BRISBANE) 27 FEBRUARY 1998

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY QI 1036 of 1996

BETWEEN: Melanie Fleur Thompson

Applicant

AND: Boyne Smelters Ltd

Respondent

JUDGE(S): MADGWICK J

DATE OF ORDER: 27 FEBRUARY 1998

WHERE MADE: SYDNEY (HEARD IN BRISBANE)

MINUTES OF ORDER

THE COURT ORDERS THAT: 1. The applicant pay to the respondent the sum of FOURTEEN THOUSAND SIX HUNDRED AND SEVENTY NINE DOLLARS AND FIFTY NINE CENTS ($14,679.59).

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY QI 1036 of 1996

BETWEEN: Melanie Fleur Thompson

Applicant

AND: Boyne Smelters Ltd

Respondent

JUDGE(S): MADGWICK J

DATE: 27 FEBRUARY 1998

PLACE: SYDNEY (HEARD IN BRISBANE)

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT HIS HONOUR: History of proceedings On 16 February 1996, the applicant, Ms Thompson, filed an application seeking reinstatement and/or compensation on account of allegedly unlawful termination of her employment with the respondent company. The matter was heard before a Judicial Registrar on 29 and 30 July 1996, and, for reasons given on 19 August 1996, the Judicial Registrar held that the respondent did not have a valid reason for terminating Ms Thompson's employment. The Judicial Registrar ordered that the company reinstate Ms Thompson "by appointing her to the position in which she was employed immediately before the said termination, or appointing her to another position on terms and conditions no less favourable than those on which [she] was employed immediately before the termination date". The Judicial Registrar also ordered that within 14 days, the respondent was to pay Ms Thompson the amount she would have earned if she had continued in that employment.