Case law page 99 of 143

1425 articles are classified in All Articles > Termination of employment > Case law


Compensation awarded for sacking distress "beyond usual level"

An Aboriginal corporation has been ordered to pay total compensation of $67,503 to three cultural heritage field officers sacked after failing to prove ancestral connections, including $15,000 in general damages for "emotional upset".



"Nightmares" over sacking decision didn't explain late appeal: Bench

A sacked Flight Attendants Association manager has failed to convince an FWC full bench to grant a one-day extension to appeal on the basis she lacked legal expertise, had "nightmares" re-reading her case and was declared by an Ayurvedic practitioner to be experiencing stress.

Foodora test case still alive

A landmark unfair dismissal case involving a former delivery rider for Foodora Australia Pty Ltd is set to continue tomorrow, despite the company last month going into voluntary administration.


'Outsourcing' definition cruels worker's dismissal claim

In a case traversing the thorny issue of recognising prior service when bringing casual labour hire in-house, the FWC has found a worker didn't qualify for unfair dismissal protection because his previous arrangement was not genuine outsourcing.

HR manager botches own dismissal claim

The FWC has refused permission for a senior HR manager to correctly identify her employer in a general protections claim after the company's US parent argued she had intentionally named it at the first instance for "strategic benefit".

Bench quick to dismiss rabbi's seven-year-late application

An FWC full bench has refused a rabbi leave to appeal a decision rejecting his third set of unfair dismissal proceedings against his past employer, on the basis it was seven years out of time and had no prospect of success.

Lawyer's admission weakened jurisdictional argument: FWC

In a decision closely examining the circumstances under which casuals satisfy minimum employment periods, the FWC has found a solicitor's admission that he didn't prepare well for a competitive hiring process contributed to leaving him one month short of being protected from unfair dismissal.