Groves v Chadwick - [2013] FCCA 1269

FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT OF AUSTRALIA

GROVES v CHADWICK

[2013] FCCA 1269

Catchwords:
INDUSTRIAL LAW – Alleged unlawful termination – summary judgment – small claims list – whether jurisdiction to order apology and reference.

PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Service in small claims list matters – expedition and efficiency.

COURTS AND JUDGES – Jurisdiction – jurisdiction to order an apology and reference in small claims list proceedings.

WORDS AND PHRASES – “amount” – “amount that an employer was required to pay to … an employee”.

Legislation:

Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth), ss.548, 570(2)(b), 772

Fair Work Bill 2008 (Cth), Explanatory Memorandum, para.2167
Federal Circuit Court of Australia Act 1999 (Cth), s.17A
Federal Circuit Court Rules 2001 (Cth), Schedule 1, Part 1, Item 16

Australian and International Pilots Association v Qantas Airways Ltd (No.3) (2007) 162 FCR 392; [2007] FCA 879
Kanapathy on behalf of Rajandran Kanapathy v in de Braekt (No.3) [2012] FMCA 1213

Applicant:

GEOFFREY PHILIP GROVES

Respondent:

MARGARET ALDONNA CHADWICK

File Number:

PEG 35 of 2013

Judgment of:

Judge Lucev

Hearing date:

4 September 2013

Date of Last Submission:

4 September 2013

Delivered at:

Perth

Delivered on:

4 September 2013

REPRESENTATION

For the Applicant:

In person (by telephone)

For the Respondent:

No appearance

ORDERS

There be summary judgment for the Applicant, save as to the application for an apology and a reference from the Respondent.
The Respondent pay the Applicant the sum of $7,695 by 17 September 2013.
The Respondent pay the Applicant’s travel costs pursuant to Item 16 of Part 1 of Schedule 1 to the Federal Circuit Court Rules 2001 (Cth) in the sum of $1683 by 17 September 2013.

FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT
OF AUSTRALIA
AT PERTH

PEG 35 of 2013

GEOFFREY PHILIP GROVES

Applicant

And

MARGARET ALDONNA CHADWICK

Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

(Edited ex tempore reasons)

This is a small claims list matter under s.548 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth).[1]
[1] “FW Act”.
The applicant, Geoffrey Philip Groves:
a)alleges unlawful termination of employment under s.772 of the FW Act; and
b)seeks $7,695 as compensation for loss of income, subsequent to his termination of employment by the respondent, Margaret Aldonna Chadwick, on 13 November 2012.
The claim was filed on 1 March 2013.
Affidavits in support of the application were filed by Mr Groves on 5 April 2013 dealing with the circumstances of the unlawful termination and his medical history.
At a first directions hearing before the Court on 10 April 2013 there was no appearance by the respondent, and the matter, which was heard by telephone-link between Perth and Melbourne by Federal Magistrate Riethmuller (as he then was), was adjourned to 7 May 2013.
At a second directions hearing on 7 May 2013 by telephone-link between Melbourne and Perth Judge Riley ordered that the matter be adjourned to 7 June 2013 for directions, but also ordered that:
2.The respondent [sic: applicant] ensure that a sealed copy of this order is personally served on the respondent with:
a.the application filed…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading Groves v Chadwick

Details

AGLC: GROVES v CHADWICK [2013] FCCA 1269
Case: [2013] FCCA 1269
Decision Date: 4 September 2013

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Supreme Court of Western Australia, in a decision by Judge Lucev, considered an application for summary judgment in a small claims list matter concerning an alleged unlawful termination. The applicant, Mr. Groves, sought to have the claim against the respondent, Ms. Chadwick, summarily dismissed.

The central legal issue before the Court was whether it possessed the jurisdiction, within the context of the small claims list, to order an apology and a reference as part of any relief granted. This question arose in the context of an alleged unlawful termination, where the applicant sought to avoid a determination on the merits by arguing for summary dismissal.

Judge Lucev reasoned that the jurisdiction of the small claims list, as established by the relevant legislation, was primarily concerned with the recovery of a monetary "amount" that an employer was required to pay to an employee. The Court found that an order for an apology or a reference did not fall within this monetary scope. Consequently, the Court concluded that it lacked the jurisdiction to make such orders within the small claims list proceedings.

The Court therefore dismissed the applicant's application for summary judgment, as the relief sought by the applicant in the substantive claim, namely an apology and a reference, was beyond the jurisdictional capacity of the small claims list.

Orders