Raymond Drury v BHP Refractories Pty Ltd [1995] IRCA 276

Federal Court of Australia

Document text

INDUSTRIAL LAW - TERMINATION OF EMPLOYMENT - Complaint of UNLAWFUL TERMINATION - Application of Division 3 of Part V1A of Industrial Relations Act - Whether contract was SPECIFIED PERIOD CONTRACT or SPECIFIED TASK CONTRACT - Abusive and insubordinate conduct by employee - Warning given - Termination before repetition of conduct - Whether termination was HARSH, UNJUST OR UNREASONABLE - COMPENSATION.

RAYMOND DRURY v BHP REFRACTORIES PTY LTD Industrial Relations Act 1988, ss170DC, 170DE, 170EE, 377 NO. NI.288 of 1994 CORAM: WILCOX CJ PLACE: Sydney DATE: 16 June 1995

IN THE INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS COURT) OF AUSTRALIA ) No. NI 288 of 1994 NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY) BETWEEN: RAYMOND DRURY Applicant AND: BHP REFRACTORIES PTY LTD Respondent MINUTES OF ORDER CORAM: WILCOX CJ PLACE: Sydney DATE: 16 June 1995 THE COURT ORDERS THAT: 1. The application for review 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 ) No. NI 288 of 1994 NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY) BETWEEN: RAYMOND DRURY Applicant AND: BHP REFRACTORIES PTY LTD Respondent CORAM: WILCOX CJ PLACE: Sydney DATE: 16 June 1995 REASONS FOR JUDGMENT WILCOX CJ: This is an application for review under s.377 of the Industrial Relations Act 1988 of a decision by a Judicial Registrar of the Court in an unlawful termination of employment case. The original applicant was a registered organisation, Construction Forestry Mining and Energy Union of Australia ("CFMEU"), of which the employee, Raymond Drury, was apparently a member. However, after the decision of the Judicial Registrar and the filing of the application for review, Mr Drury decided to represent himself. He applied to be substituted as the sole applicant. With the concurrence of the CFMEU representative and without opposition from the respondent employer, I granted this application.

Read full text →

Official source

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.

Not checked yet

Last checked with source on —

Open official source

Checking whether the official page can be embedded…

Study brief

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.

Unknown

No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.

You've got 21 of 22 free Acts left this visit. Sign up anytime for Facts, Related, and study briefs too.

Document text

RAYMOND DRURY v BHP REFRACTORIES PTY LTD Industrial Relations Act 1988, ss170DC, 170DE, 170EE, 377 NO. NI.288 of 1994 CORAM: WILCOX CJ PLACE: Sydney DATE: 16 June 1995

IN THE INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS COURT) OF AUSTRALIA ) No. NI 288 of 1994 NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY) BETWEEN: RAYMOND DRURY Applicant AND: BHP REFRACTORIES PTY LTD Respondent MINUTES OF ORDER CORAM: WILCOX CJ PLACE: Sydney DATE: 16 June 1995 THE COURT ORDERS THAT: 1. The application for review 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 ) No. NI 288 of 1994 NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY) BETWEEN: RAYMOND DRURY Applicant AND: BHP REFRACTORIES PTY LTD Respondent CORAM: WILCOX CJ PLACE: Sydney DATE: 16 June 1995 REASONS FOR JUDGMENT WILCOX CJ: This is an application for review under s.377 of the Industrial Relations Act 1988 of a decision by a Judicial Registrar of the Court in an unlawful termination of employment case. The original applicant was a registered organisation, Construction Forestry Mining and Energy Union of Australia ("CFMEU"), of which the employee, Raymond Drury, was apparently a member. However, after the decision of the Judicial Registrar and the filing of the application for review, Mr Drury decided to represent himself. He applied to be substituted as the sole applicant. With the concurrence of the CFMEU representative and without opposition from the respondent employer, I granted this application.

Read full text →