Billy Williams-Noonan v Griffith University
[2015] FWCFB 7675
•11 NOVEMBER 2015
| [2015] FWCFB 7675 |
| FAIR WORK COMMISSION |
DECISION |
Fair Work Act 2009
s.604 - Appeal of decisions
v
Griffith University
(C2015/6796)
VICE PRESIDENT WATSON | MELBOURNE, 11 NOVEMBER 2015 |
Appeal against decision [2015] FWC 6502 of Deputy President Kovacic at Melbourne on 18 September 2015 in matter number C2015/792 – Permission to appeal – Whether arguable case of error – Whether grounds of appeal attract the public interest – Permission to appeal not granted – Fair Work Act 2009 – ss. 365 and 604.
[1] This decision is an edited version of a decision give on transcript at the conclusion of the hearing on 28 October 2015. The decision under appeal is a decision of Deputy President Kovacic declining to grant an extension of time for filing a general protections application under the Fair Work Act2009. The application was lodged 245 days outside the statutory timeframe.
[2] It is clear from the decision of the Deputy President and also from the submissions made to us that there is an unfortunate set of circumstances involved in this matter. However the decision is classically a discretionary decision where the Deputy President was required pursuant to the provisions of s.366 of the Act to consider whether there were exceptional circumstances taking into account a number of specified matters.
[3] An appeal against such a decision can only be granted if it is demonstrated that the discretion was not properly exercised because of an error in the exercise of the discretion.
[4] Permission to appeal can be granted if there is an arguable case of error and it must be granted if it is considered by this Bench that the public interest is attracted in a matter. An appeal is not a redetermination of the matter.
[5] Having regard to all of the circumstances we are not satisfied that there is an arguable case of error in the Deputy President's decision. It appears to us that he considered all of the relevant factors and made findings clearly available on the evidence before him.
[6] Further we are not satisfied that it is in the public interest that permission to appeal be granted in this case. It appears to us that the applicant for permission to appeal is seeking an alternative result, but in essence is seeking to reargue the points that were raised and considered by the Deputy President.
[7] In those circumstances we decline to grant permission to appeal. The application for permission to appeal is dismissed.
VICE PRESIDENT
Appearances:
Mr D. Noonan on behalf of Mr B. Williams-Noonan.
Mr K. Greedy on behalf of Griffith University.
Hearing details:
2015.
Sydney – Video Link to Brisbane and Hobart.
28 October.
Final written submissions:
Mr B. Williams-Noonan on 19 October 2015.
Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer
<Price code A, PR573731>
0
1
0