Safe Places Community Services Ltd has a s.394 (Application for unfair dismissal remedy) to answer in front of Commissioner Spencer in chambers in Brisbane (Addo).
October 28, 2019
A s.185 (Enterprise agreement) application from Hobart District Nursing Service Inc for the Hobart District Nursing Service Inc Now Nursing Enterprise Agreement 2018 (Health and welfare services) has been granted by Deputy President Millhouse in Melbourne on 24 October 2019.
October 28, 2019
Bright Lily Healthcare Pty Ltd has a s.372 (Application to deal with other contravention disputes) to argue before Commissioner Williams in chambers in Perth (Marek).
October 25, 2019
Australia’s professional organisation for general practitioners has announced chief executive officer Dr Zena Burgess is stepping down after 11 years in the role.
October 25, 2019
ThomsonAdsett has announced the appointment of Simon Drysdale as its group director of seniors living.
October 25, 2019
Pharmaceutical Society of Australia has appointed Mark Kinsela as chief executive officer.
October 25, 2019
Mary Patetsos has been re-elected as chairperson of the Federation of Ethnic Communities’ Councils of Australia, the national body representing Australians from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds.
October 25, 2019
A s.604 (Appeal of decision) by Inna Grabovsky against United Protestant Association NSW Ltd T/A UPA has been rejected by Deputy President Clancy, Deputy President Masson and Commissioner Wilson in Melbourne on 23 October 2019. “The Appellant’s grounds of appeal do not contain any comprehensible let alone arguable contention of appealable error directly referenceable to the Decision. Her grounds for the grant of permission to appeal in the public interest raise matters which bear little or no relationship to the subject matter of the Decision. Her submissions re-agitated numerous matters which she has previously argued before the Commission in a range of applications and appeal proceedings, but she did not attempt to identify any error of fact or law in the Decision itself. Independent of the Appellant’s notice of appeal and submissions, we have carefully reviewed the Decision. It is apparent that the Commissioner considered all the matters required to be considered under s 368(3) of the Act, arrived at the requisite satisfaction on a basis firmly supported by the evidence and procedural history of the various matters involving the parties that have been before the Commission and made an evaluative judgment that was reasonably open to him to make. No basis for an arguable contention of appealable error is ascertainable. Furthermore we agree with the Decision. From the very outset, the Respondent has held the belief that the General Protections Application will not resolve and has declined to participate in a conference. 28 The Respondent has maintained this position. The Decision does not raise any question of law or general principle worthy of consideration at the appellate level. For these reasons, we are not satisfied that the grant of permission to appeal would be in the public interest. We so order,” ruled the Full Bench.
