FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Davies v Australian Postal Corporation [2005] FCA 338
SUZANNE M DAVIES v AUSTRALIAN POSTAL CORPORATION
NSD 1752 of 2004ALLSOP J
30 MARCH 2005
SYDNEY
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY
NSD 1752 of 2004
ON APPEAL FROM A SINGLE JUDGE OF THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
BETWEEN:
SUZANNE M DAVIES
APPLICANTAND:
AUSTRALIAN POSTAL CORPORATION
RESPONDENTJUDGE:
ALLSOP J
DATE OF ORDER:
30 MARCH 2005
WHERE MADE:
SYDNEY
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1.The application be dismissed with no order as to costs.
Note: Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY
NSD 1752 of 2004
ON APPEAL FROM A SINGLE JUDGE OF THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
BETWEEN:
SUZANNE M DAVIES
APPLICANTAND:
AUSTRALIAN POSTAL CORPORATION
RESPONDENT
JUDGE:
ALLSOP J
DATE:
30 MARCH 2005
PLACE:
SYDNEY
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
In this matter, the applicant, Ms Davies, has filed an application for an extension of time to file and serve a notice of appeal from a decision of a Judge of this Court given in April 2002.
Inquiries made by my associate indicate that the application has not been served on the respondent.
On 21 January 2005 my associate sent to Ms Davies at the address shown on her application a letter which stated, amongst other things:
I advise that his Honour has listed the application for hearing on Wednesday, 30 March 2005 at 9.30 am.
No appearance has been made by the applicant. I have had the matter called three times outside.
In all the circumstances, I dismiss the application and I make no order as to costs.
I certify that the preceding five (5) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Honourable Justice Allsop . Associate:
Dated: 5 April 2005
No appearance by the Applicant: Date of Hearing: 30 March 2005 Date of Judgment: 30 March 2005
- AGLC
- Davies v Australian Postal Corporation [2005] FCA 338
- Case
- [2005] FCA 338
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The court first considered the basis of the applicant's termination. It was established that Davies was dismissed following an investigation into allegations of misconduct. The court examined the evidence presented during the investigation and the procedural fairness afforded to Davies. The court also considered whether the decision to terminate was within the scope of the employer's authority and whether it was reasonable in the circumstances. The court found that the investigation was conducted in a manner that adhered to the principles of natural justice, including providing Davies with an opportunity to respond to the allegations and to be accompanied by a support person. The evidence presented was sufficient to support the decision to terminate Davies' employment.
Consequently, the court held that the decision to terminate Davies' employment was lawful and that the process adhered to the principles of natural justice. The application was dismissed with no order as to costs.
Orders
Orders of the court
1. The application be dismissed with no order as to costs.
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Established by: ALLSOP J
Full text does not contain this section.