NSW Caselaw
Industrial Relations Commission of New South Wales
CITATION : Pathak v Kone Elevators Pty Ltd [2002] NSWIRComm 360 PARTIES : Sharad Pathak Kone Elevators Pty Ltd FILE NUMBER: IRC 3511 of 2002 CORAM: Grayson DP Unfair dismissal - challenge to jurisdiction - applicant's annual remuneration allegedly greater than amount prescribed by regulations - dispute as to actual date of dismissal - dispute as to value of motor vehicle component of remuneration package - dispute as to superannuation component of remuneration package - dispute as to health benefit component of remuneration package - agreement as to base salary and profit share components - coverage by industrial instrument not contended CATCHWORDS : Held, applicant's annual remuneration greater than amount prescribed by regulations, absent probative evidence to the contrary, respondent's evidence supported by business records accepted, remedy in unfair dismissal not available - application dismissed Industrial Relations Act 1996 LEGISLATION CITED : Industrial Relations Regulations 1996 Workplace Relations Act 1996 HEARING DATES: 11/10/2002 DATE OF JUDGMENT: 12/20/2002
Mr J Drake, agent LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES: Mr B O'Donnell, Australian Industry Group
JUDGMENT: - 6 - INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS COMMISSION OF NEW SOUTH WALES Coram: Grayson, DP Friday, 20 December 2002
SHARAD PATHAK V KONE ELEVATORS PTY LTD
Application by Sharad Pathak re unfair dismissal pursuant to s 84 of the Industrial Relations Act 1996 DECISION NSWIRComm 360
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.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
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.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate