Robert Clive Chester v Perth Itec Pty Ltd as trustee for Anglicare/Itec Trust [1995] IRCA 235

C A T C H W O R D S INDUSTRIAL LAW - Termination of employment - claim for unlawful termination - allegation of intimidation of applicant's witness by respondent - whether procedural fairness - compensation. INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT 1988, Ss 170 EA, 170DC, 170DE, 170EE

Nicolson v Heaven & Earth Gallery Pty Ltd (1994) 126 ALR 233 ROBERT CLIVE CHESTER V PERTH ITEC PTY LTD AS TRUSTEE FOR ANGLICARE/ITEC TRUST - WI 675 of 1994 BEFORE: BOON JR PLACE: PERTH DATE: 9 JUNE 1995

IN THE INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS) COURT OF AUSTRALIA ) WESTERN AUSTRALIA ) DISTRICT REGISTRY ) No. WI 675 of 1994 BETWEEN: ROBERT CLIVE CHESTER - Applicant AND: PERTH ITEC PTY LTD AS TRUSTEE FOR ANGLICARE/ITEC TRUST - Respondent MINUTE OF ORDERS BEFORE: BOON JR PLACE: PERTH DATE: 9 JUNE 1995 THE COURT DECLARES AND ORDERS THAT: 1. The termination of the applicant's employment by the respondent contravened S170DC of Division 3 of Part VIA of the Industrial Relations Act 1988. 2. The respondent pay compensation in the sum of $5000 to the applicant within 21 days of the date of this order. NOTE: Settlement and entry of Orders dealt with by Order 36 of the Industrial Relations Court Rules.

IN THE INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS) COURT OF AUSTRALIA ) WESTERN AUSTRALIA ) DISTRICT REGISTRY ) No. WI 675 of 1994 BETWEEN: ROBERT CLIVE CHESTER - Applicant AND: PERTH ITEC PTY LTD AS TRUSTEE FOR ANGLICARE/ITEC TRUST - Respondent BEFORE: BOON JR PLACE: PERTH DATE: 9 JUNE 1995 REASONS FOR JUDGMENT This is an application under Section 170EA arising out of the termination of the applicant's employment with the respondent. The applicant contends that the termination of his employment contravened the provisions of the Industrial Relations Act 1988 in a number of ways. In the first place, the applicant says that the procedural fairness provisions of Section 170DC of the Act were breached in that the respondent terminated the applicant's employment for reasons related to the applicant's conduct and performance without giving the applicant the opportunity to defend himself against the allegations made. Secondly, if it is held that procedural fairness was accorded to the applicant, the applicant says that his employment was terminated without a valid reason, or valid reasons, connected with his capacity or conduct within the meaning of Section 170DE Sub-section (1) of the Act. Further, it is said that in any event the termination was harsh, unjust or unreasonable within the meaning of Sub-section (2) of Section 170 DE.