Jeremy Edward Wilson v IPC Corporation (Australia) Pty Ltd [1995] IRCA 653

CATCHWORDS INDUSTRIAL LAW - termination of employment - review of decision of Judicial Registrar - whether Court has discretion to refuse to order reinstatement - whether offer of re-employment immediately after termination relevant to exercise of power to order re-instatement - whether income earned since termination can be considered in determining remuneration lost. Industrial Relations Act 1988 S170EE(1) and (2) Liddell v Lembke (1994) 127 ALR 342 No. AI 0206R of 1994 JEREMY EDWARD WILSON v IPC CORPORATION (AUSTRALIA) PTY LTD MOORE J CANBERRA 8 December 1995

IN THE INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ) ) COURT OF AUSTRALIA ) No. AI 0206R of 1994 ) NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY) BETWEEN: JEREMY EDWARD WILSON Applicant AND: IPC CORPORATION (AUSTRALIA) PTY LIMITED Respondent JUDGE: Moore J PLACE: Canberra DATE: 8 December 1995 ORDER OF THE COURT THE COURT ORDERS THAT: 1. The applicant be reinstated by the respondent to a position in Melbourne which is substantially the same as that occupied by him in Canberra immediately prior to the termination. 2. The location of the position in Melbourne to be as agreed between the parties. The Court notes that a position at Box Hill, Heidelberg, the Central Business District of Melbourne or the companies Head Office is practicable. Leave is granted to either applicant or respondent to approach the Court on 24 hours notice to the Court and other parties to determine this issue if the parties can not reach agreement on the location. 3. The respondent to reinstate the applicant on, the same terms and conditions including commission as applied to the applicant at the date of termination and that such commence from the date of termination. 4. The period between the date of termination and the date of this decision be treated as continuous employment of Mr Wilson by the respondent for all purposes.