Meek v Minister for Water Supply, Sewerage & Drainage [1961] HCA 37

High Court of Australia Dixon C.J. Fullagar and Kitto JJ. Meek v Minister for Water Supply, Sewerage & Drainage [1961] HCA 37

ORDER Special leave to appeal refused.

The judgment of the Court was delivered by Dixon C.J.:—

June 15 Dixon C.J., Fullagar and Kitto JJ.

In this rather unfortunate piece of litigation the applicant desires to appeal to this court, in circumstances which require him to seek special leave, in an action which in substance is framed as one for wrongful dismissal.

He was employed under an award, or an agreement which has been converted into an award, which provides what his contract of service shall be. It provides that the contract of service shall be by the day and shall be terminable by one day's notice on either side except in the case of a casual worker where one hour's notice shall suffice.

Under that award he is entitled to annual leave. The provision relating to annual leave says that except as provided elsewhere in the award a period of two consecutive weeks' leave with payment of ordinary wages as prescribed shall be allowed annually to a worker by his employer after a period of 12 months' continuous service with such employer.

The plaintiff took a stand on the interpretation of the clause relating to annual leave, a stand which was not agreed in by the respondent, the Minister for Water Supply, Sewerage and Drainage. I do not go into the contention on the plaintiff's part: it is not important to do so. It is enough to say that he desired to take his annual leave in accumulated form on dates determined by himself.

As a result of the controversy it was decided that his services should be terminated, and notice was given pursuant to the clause which I first read. It conformed with the clause, and unless there was some answer to it his services were lawfully terminated.