Federal Court of Australia
CATCHWORDS INDUSTRIAL LAW - Termination of employment - Complaint of unlawful termination - abolition of public service position - Public Sector Management Act 1994 (W.A.) - Redeployment and Redundancy Regulations - failure to consult applicant - unfair - Abolition of office did not constitute termination of employment. Industrial Relations Act 1988, S170EA, S170EE Mann v Capital Territory Health Commission [1982] 2 IR 29
Turner v Sawdon & Co [1901] 2 KB 653
Collier v Sunday Referee Publishing Co Ltd [1940] 2 KB 647
Hughes v Western Australian Cricket Association [1986] 19 FCR 10
Slonim v Fellows [1984] 154 CLR 505
Perks v Willet [1974] 22 FLR 274
Australian Journalists Association v Wright Prospecting [1980] 60 WAIG 2291
Transport Workers Union v Mount Newman Mining Company [1989] 60 WAIG 1036
Marriott v Oxford and District Co-Op Society Limited (No 2) [1969] 3 WLR 984
Siagian v Sanel Pty Ltd [1994] 122 ALR 333
Association of Professional Engineers, Scientists and Managers Australia (A.P.E.M.S.A.) v Skilled Engineering Pty Ltd; and Others [1994] 122 ALR 471
JEREMY RICHARD ARMITAGE V LEGAL AID COMMISSION OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA No. WI-437/94 Before:Ryan JR Place: Melbourne Date: 17 March 1995
IN THE INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS COURT OF AUSTRALIA WESTERN AUSTRALIA DISTRICT REGISTRY Matter No WI-437/94 B E T W E E N: JEREMY RICHARD ARMITAGE Applicant AND: LEGAL AID COMMISSION OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA Respondent RYAN JR MINUTES OF ORDER
17 MARCH 1995 THE COURT ORDERS THAT: The application be dismissed. NOTE: Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Industrial Relations Court Rules.
IN THE INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS COURT OF AUSTRALIA WESTERN AUSTRALIA DISTRICT REGISTRY Matter No WI-437/94 B E T W E E N: JEREMY RICHARD ARMITAGE Applicant AND: LEGAL AID COMMISSION OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA Respondent COURT: RYAN JR PLACE:MELBOURNE DATE: 17 MARCH 1995 THE APPLICATION The applicant is a lawyer who has spent the last sixteen years in senior positions in the Legal Aid Commission of Western Australia. He has sought remedy for unlawful termination of employment. The application is unusual in that while his position of Assistant Director Legal Services was abolished in early October 1994 the applicant has continued to attend at his workplace and he continues to receive the level of salary paid to him as Assistant Director, Legal Services. There is absolutely no doubt that the office he occupied from March 1988 to October 1994 is, like Monty Python's parrot, defunct. It is no more. It has ceased to be. The crucial question is whether the employment of the applicant has been ended at the initiative of the employer in such a way as to bring the termination, if it be a termination, within the jurisdiction of Division 3 Part VIA of the Industrial Relations Act 1988.
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