Dorsch v Head Oceania Pty Ltd

Dorsch v Head Oceania Pty Ltd involved the appeal by Dorsch against the dismissal of his various claims for adverse action, unreasonable work hours, and breach of contract, except for the failure to pay accrued annual leave entitlements upon termination. Dorsch had been employed simultaneously by Head Oceania and its Hong Kong subsidiary, Mares Asia Pacific. His employment was terminated on account of his conduct towards subordinates. Dorsch challenged the primary judge's findings that many of his claims related to his employment with Mares Asia Pacific, that the decision-maker was an agent of Head Oceania, that the adverse action claims were not taken by Head Oceania, that there was no adverse action by omission, and that Dorsch had not established he worked excessive hours or that there was a request or requirement that he work those hours.

The court found no errors in the primary judge's reasoning. Dorsch's argument that Mr Skrobanek, who made the termination decision, was not an agent of Head Oceania was rejected because the primary judge had found that Mr Skrobanek had the authority to make decisions regarding employment, and his decision was implemented by Head Oceania. Dorsch's claims of adverse action were found not to have been taken by Head Oceania as they related to his employment with Mares Asia Pacific. Dorsch's claims of unreasonable work hours and lack of support were also found to concern his employment with Mares Asia Pacific, not Head Oceania. Dorsch failed to establish that he worked excessive hours or that there was a requirement for him to do so.

The appeal was dismissed, and leave to appeal was granted despite being filed out of time, as all questions of penalties and costs had been finally determined by the time of appeal. The court granted an extension of time and leave to file an Amended Notice of Appeal.