Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Vink v LED Technologies Pty Ltd [2013] FCA 443 Citation: Vink v LED Technologies Pty Ltd [2013] FCA 443
Appeal from: Vink v LED Technologies Pty Ltd [2012] FMCA 917
Parties: MARTIN BERNARD VINK v LED TECHNOLOGIES PTY LTD (ACN 100 887 474)
File number: VID 858 of 2012
Judge: TRACEY J
Date of judgment: 16 May 2013
Catchwords: INDUSTRIAL LAW – Appeal from decision of Federal Magistrate dismissing application alleging contravention of general protection provision of Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) – whether Federal Magistrate should have drawn inference that appellant was dismissed because of age – whether Jones v Dunkel inference could be drawn in relation to failure of respondent to call certain evidence – whether Federal Magistrate failed to appreciate potential for multiple substantial and operative reasons for adverse action being taken against employee
Legislation: Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) – ss 342, 346, 351, 360, 361, 539
Cases cited: Board of Bendigo Regional Institute of Technical and Further Education v Barclay (2012) 290 ALR 647 – applied Fox v Percy (2003) 214 CLR 118 – applied Vink v LED Technologies Pty Ltd [2012] FMCA 917 – affirmed Vink v LED Technologies Pty Ltd (No 2) [2012] FMCA 1001 – cited
Date of hearing: 29 April 2013
Place: Melbourne
Division: GENERAL DIVISION
Category: Catchwords
Number of paragraphs: 57
Counsel for the Appellant: Mr J Twigg
Solicitor for the Appellant: Vadarlis & Associates
Counsel for the Respondent: Ms S Bingham
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