Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Smith v ACN 101 390 505 Pty Ltd (in liq) [2020] FCA 940 Appeal from: Smith v Sedgwick Callaghan Accountants Pty Ltd [2018] FCCA 3204
File number(s): QUD 874 of 2018
Judge(s): COLLIER J
Date of judgment: 7 July 2020
Catchwords: INDUSTRIAL LAW – general protections – adverse action – where appellant claimed contraventions of s 351(1) Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) and dismissal for reasons of age – where s 361 Fair Work Act creates presumption that adverse action taken for prohibited reason unless employer proves otherwise – whether primary Judge took correct approach – whether appellant required to establish prima facie case within s 361 Fair Work Act – whether Jones v Dunkel inference should be drawn in relation to specific evidence – extent to which trial Judge can assist a litigant in person – allegations of "tainted" evidence – extent to which necessary for primary Judge to refer to all evidence before Court – credit of witnesses – proper approach by appellate Court in considering appeal against findings at first instance PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – appeal unopposed – no contradictor to appellant's submissions – requirement of judicial function that Court be satisfied as to proper disposition of matter
Legislation: Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) ss 342, 351, 361(1)
Cases cited: Adler v Australian Securities and Investments Commission (2003) 179 FLR 1; [2003] NSWCA 131 AFT Pharmaceuticals (AU) Pty Limited v Reckitt Benckiser (Australia) Pty Limited (2020) 143 ACSR 522; [2020] FCAFC 45 Australian Securities and Investments Commission v Hellicar (2012) 247 CLR 345; [2012] HCA 17 Board of Bendigo Regional Institute of Technical and Further Education v Barclay [No 1] (2012) 248 CLR 500; [2012] HCA 32 Bottega Rotolo P/L v Saturno's Colonist Tavern Pty Ltd (2008) 100 SASR 1; [2008] SASC 6 Carlisle Homes Pty Ltd v Barrett Property Group Pty Ltd [2009] FCAFC 31 Celand v Skycity Adelaide Pty Ltd [2017] FCAFC 222 Fletcher Construction Australia Ltd v Lines MacFarlane & Marshall Pty Ltd (No 2) [2002] VSCA 189 Fortescue Metals Group v Warrie on behalf of the Yindjibarndi People (2019) 374 ALR 448; [2019] FCAFC 177 Fox v Percy (2003) 214 CLR 118; [2003] HCA 22 Jones v Dunkel (1959) 101 CLR 298; [1959] HCA 8 Louth v Diprose (1992) 175 CLR 621; [1992] HCA 61 Millington v Waste Wise Environmental Pty Ltd (2015) 295 FLR 301; [2015] VSC 167 N Johnson (Appellant/Husband) and M L Johnson (Cross-Appellant/Wife) [1997] FamCA 32 New Zealand v Johnston (2011) 274 ALR 509; [2011] FCAFC 2 Rajski v Scitec Corporation Pty Ltd (unreported, 16 June, 1986 (Butterworths Unreported Judgments BC8600928)) Tricarico v Dunn Bay Holdings Pty Ltd [2012] FCA 271 White v R [2017] NZCA 322
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