A s.394 (Application for unfair dismissal remedy) by Andrew Portelli against Baxter Healthcare Pty Ltd T/A Baxter Healthcare has gone seriously awry. People who incur legal costs in a matter before the Fair Work Commission generally pay their own costs. However, the Commission has the discretion to order one party to an unfair dismissal matter to pay the other party’s legal or representational costs, but only where the Commission is satisfied the matter was commenced or responded either vexatiously or without reasonable cause, or with no reasonable prospect of success. This decision is about whether Andrew Portelli should be held liable for the costs of Baxter Healthcare Pty Ltd which it incurred in defending an unfair dismissal application brought against it by Mr Portelli. Mr Portelli commenced his unfair dismissal application but discontinued it on 31 January 2017 (that being 6 days before the matter was listed to be heard on 6 February 2017). On 9 February 2017 Baxter made an Application for Costs. It filed an Amended Application for Costs on 7 April 2017. Baxter seeks costs in the amount of $10,332.00 on an indemnity basis. However the FWC gave him the benefit of the doubt and went for “the Commission has no jurisdiction pursuant to s.611 of the FW Act to order costs.”
May 10, 2017
Rumbalara Aboriginal Co-Operative Ltd is to face a s.372 (Application to deal with other contravention disputes) in front of Deputy President Hamilton in Court 3 & Conference Room B – Level 6 in Melbourne at 10.15am.
May 10, 2017
A s.185 (Enterprise agreement) application by The Commissioners of the Presbyterian Church in WA T/A Braemar Presbyterian Care for their Braemar Presbyterian Care Employees Agreement 2016 has been approved by Commissioner Lee in Melbourne on May 2017.
May 9, 2017
TSA (VIC) Property Trust as Trustee the Salvation Army (Vic) Social Work is again facing a trio of s.394 (Application for unfair dismissal remedy) lodged by Bokori-Mayman/Ewels/Talarico.
May 9, 2017
Central Gippsland Health Service is facing a s.394 (Application for unfair dismissal remedy) claim before Deputy President Gostencnik in the Magistrates Court Foster Street Sale at 10am (Puser).
May 9, 2017
A former Tasmanian health boss has lost her wrongful dismissal case against the Tasmanian Government and may be forced to pay court costs. Jane Holden was suing the Government for $2.2 million for loss of income and damage to her reputation and had argued unproven allegations contained in the 2014 Investigation into allegations of nepotism and conflict of interest by senior health officials report by the Tasmanian Integrity Commission were the basis for her sacking. She was accused of nepotism and misconduct in the report, which was released just prior to her dismissal as acting head of the Southern Area Health Service in 2014. But the Government argued Ms Holden was sacked from her $416,000-a-year role because her substantive position had been made redundant and there was no other suitable role for her. Justice Shan Tennent said there was no formal appointment of Ms Holden to a new role and she was satisfied that a redundancy situation existed. She did not read out her full reasons for the judgement, but they have been published online. Ms Holden, who is now managing a hospital in remote Papua New Guinea, was not in the Supreme Court for the judgement, with Justice Tennent adding she had informed Ms Holden that her presence was not necessary. During her trial in November last year, Ms Holden took to the witness stand and said she was “shattered” over the sacking. She said she had struggled to find a new job and was now earning half of her previous salary. Outside the court, her lawyer Mark Rinaldi said it was a disappointing outcome and his client would be reviewing the decision. When asked if an appeal was likely, he said: “We’ll have to see”. Ms Holden has 21 days to lodge an appeal.
May 9, 2017
TERMINATION OF EMPLOYMENT – extension of time – representative error – ss.381, 394 Fair Work Act 2009 – application for relief from unfair dismissal filed seven days beyond statutory time limit – applicant’s position terminated on 22 September 2016 – application filed late due to error of applicant’s previous representative – principles of Nulty and Kornicki applied – Commission satisfied that applicant sent relevant documentation package to correct address but without the Company name – respondent submitted that they would suffer prejudice – Commission found no fault in applicant’s previous representative as the applicant did not follow their standard procedures of engagement or communication – found applicant’s late lodgement due to applicant’s own mistake in addressing the envelope – regarded not to be a fatal flaw – Commission satisfied applicant undertook sufficient activity to show intention of challenging termination – Commission satisfied applicant’s mistake was an exceptional circumstance – extension of time granted. Bell v Institute for Urban Indigenous Health Ltd
May 8, 2017
TSA (VIC) Property Trust as Trustee the Salvation Army (Vic) Social Work has a trio of s.394 (Application for unfair dismissal remedy) claimants lined up seeking retribution (Bokori-Mayman/Ewels/Talarico).
