Croft and Roads and Maritime Services [2012] NSWIRComm 102

Industrial Relations Commission New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Croft and Roads and Maritime Services [2012] NSWIRComm 102 Hearing dates: 7 September 2012 Decision date: 07 September 2012 Jurisdiction: Industrial Relations Commission Before: Boland J President; Harrison DP; Staff J Decision: Leave to appeal is refused. Catchwords: APPEAL - application for leave to appeal and appeal - unfair dismissal - whether Commissioner erred in analysing evidence - findings as to credit - public interest test not satisfied - application to call fresh evidence refused - application dismissed - Industrial Relations Act 1996, s 188; s 191(2) Legislation Cited: Industrial Relations Act 1996 Cases Cited: Croft v RMS [2012] NSWIRComm 1004 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Wesley Shane Croft (Appellant) Roads and Maritime Services (Respondent) Representation: Mr W Croft (In Person) Mr R Meehan of counsel (Respondent) Solicitors: Minter Ellison (Respondent) File Number(s): IRC 518 of 2012 Decision under appeal Citation: Croft v Roads and Traffic Authority Division of the Government Service of NSW [2011] NSWIRComm 1046 Date of Decision: 2011-09-14 00:00:00 Before: Ritchie C File Number(s): IRC 827 of 2011

decision of the commission 1Wesley Shane Croft ("the appellant") seeks leave to appeal and to appeal from a decision of Commissioner Ritchie given on 29 March 2012 in Matter No IRC 827 of 2011 dismissing an application brought pursuant to s 84 of the Industrial Relations Act 1996 ("the Act"): Croft v RMS [2012] NSWIRComm 1004. 2After hearing the parties on 7 September 2012 on the question of leave the Full Bench determined that leave to appeal should be refused. The Full Bench made orders to that effect. What follows are the reasons for refusing leave. 3It should be observed at the outset that a significant delay has occurred in the disposition of this appeal. This was caused by, firstly, the Commission granting an indulgence to the appellant to instruct new legal representation and, secondly, to allow the appellant to amend his notice of appeal.