Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Cucanic v IGA Distribution (Vic) Pty Ltd [2004] FCA 1226
INDUSTRIAL LAW – application for unlawful termination on grounds of disability – applicant injured in 2001 while working as Storeworker Grade II – employment terminated in 2003 while applicant engaged in light duties – whether "particular position" was determined exclusively by reference to the duties enumerated in the relevant Enterprise Bargaining Agreement – what were "inherent requirements" of applicant's "particular position" – whether applicant able to carry out the "inherent requirements of the particular position" Workplace Relations Act 1996 (Cth) ss 170CP, 170CR, 170CK Qantas Airways Ltd v Christie (1998) 193 CLR 280, applied
Cosma v Qantas Airways (2002) 124 FCR 504, referred to
X v Commonwealth (1999) 200 CLR 177, applied DAVID CUCANIC v IGA DISTRIBUTION (VIC) PTY LTD V 627 OF 2003 MARSHALL J 20 SEPTEMBER 2004 MELBOURNE
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
VICTORIA DISTRICT REGISTRY V 627 OF 2003
BETWEEN: DAVID CUCANIC
APPLICANT
AND: IGA DISTRIBUTION (VIC) PTY LTD
(ABN 87 006 509 280)
RESPONDENT
JUDGE: MARSHALL J
DATE OF ORDER: 20 SEPTEMBER 2004
WHERE MADE: MELBOURNE
THE COURT ORDERS THAT: 1. The application be dismissed. Note: Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
VICTORIA DISTRICT REGISTRY V 627 OF 2003
BETWEEN: DAVID CUCANIC
APPLICANT
AND: IGA DISTRIBUTION (VIC) PTY LTD (ABN 87 006 509 280)
RESPONDENT
JUDGE: MARSHALL J
DATE: 20 SEPTEMBER 2004
PLACE: MELBOURNE
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT 1 The applicant, Mr David Cucanic, has applied to the Court pursuant to s 170CP of the Workplace Relations Act 1996 (Cth) ("the Act") for an order under s 170CR in respect of an alleged contravention of s 170CK(2)(f). 2 Mr Cucanic alleged that his employment was terminated by the respondent, IGA Distribution (Vic) Pty Ltd, ("IGA") for reasons which included the reason that he suffered from a physical disability. IGA conceded, through its counsel, that it terminated Mr Cucanic's employment for that reason, but alleged that that reason was based on the inherent requirements of the particular position occupied by Mr Cucanic; see s 170CK(3) of the Act.
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate