LINSEN v APOLLO BAY SUPERMARKET [1997] IRCA 2

DECISION NO:2/97 C A T C H W O R D S INDUSTRIAL LAW - termination of employment - misconduct - unauthorised removal of goods - respondent puts allegation to Applicant but relies primarily on police investigation - Respondent honestly believed on reasonable grounds employee guilty of serious misconduct - summary termination justified Workplace Relations Act 1996 ss.170DB, 170DC, 170DE, 170EA CASES: State of Victoria v Commonwealth of Australia (1996) 138 ALR 129

Selvachandran v Peteron Plastics Pty Ltd (1995) 62 IR 371 at 372) Sangwin v Imogen Pty Ltd (unreported, IRCA, von Doussa J, 8 March 1996) Bi-Lo Pty Ltd v Hooper (1992) 53 IR 224 Byrne v Australian Airlines Ltd (1995) 131 ALR 422 Lane v Arrowcrest Group Pty Ltd (1990) 27 FCR 427; 99 ALR 45 Kerr v Jaroma Pty Ltd (unreported, Marshall J, 7 October 1996). Nettlefold v Kym Smoker Pty Ltd (unreported, IRCA, Lee J, 4 October 1996). LINSEN -v- APOLLO BAY SUPERMARKET No. VI-1154 of 1996 Before: Judicial Registrar Ryan Place: Melbourne Date: 3 January 1997 INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS COURT OF AUSTRALIA VICTORIA DISTRICT REGISTRY VI-1154 of 1996 B E T W E E N : HANS LINSEN Applicant AND GRAEME AND MARIANNE LINTON trading as APOLLO BAY SUPERMARKET Respondent MINUTES OF ORDERS Judicial Registrar Ryan 3 January 1997 THE COURT ORDERS: 1. That the Application be dismissed. NOTE: Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with by Order 36 of the Industrial Relations Court Rules. INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS COURT OF AUSTRALIA VICTORIA DISTRICT REGISTRY VI-1154 of 1996 B E T W E E N : HANS LINSEN Applicant AND GRAEME AND MARIANNE LINTON trading as APOLLO BAY SUPERMARKET Respondent Before: Judicial Registrar Ryan Place: Melbourne Date: 3 January 1997 REASONS FOR JUDGMENT THE CLAIM The Applicant, Mr Linsen, claims unlawful termination of employment. He states in his application (S170EA - Form 132) that: (i) he is 59 years of age