TERMINATION OF EMPLOYMENT – misconduct – ss.394, 400, 604 Fair Work Act 2009 – permission to appeal – Full Bench – appellant employer sought permission to appeal decision granting unfair dismissal remedy for respondent employee – employee granted compensation in lieu of reinstatement at first instance – employer contended evidence at first instance too fragile to support findings made at first instance – no probative evidence to support finding at first instance that witnesses colluded together to make complaint against employee consistent – contended permission to appeal would be in public interest because issues in appeal concerned significant and fundamental appellable error – Full Bench found contents on emails containing complaints not so strikingly similar as to support inference much less conclusion of collusion in their preparation – findings of collusion in context in which findings were made amounted to findings of serious inappropriate conduct in the workplace – such serious findings must have probative evidentiary foundation – Full Bench found it arguable that evidence relied upon by Commission could not properly support serious findings that he made – found collusion findings appeared to be inextricably linked to motives attributed to each of the witnesses to injure employee’s employment with employer so as to raise arguable case of appellable error as to credibility findings made by Commission – Full Bench satisfied arguable case of appellable error in nature [House v The King] – permission to appeal granted – substantive appeal to be heard. Appeal by Thompson Healthcare P/L against decision and order of Sams DP of 28 July 2017 [[2017] FWC 3505] Re: Adamopoulos
