Guthrie v Visa Global Logistics Pty Ltd

In this matter before the Federal Circuit Court of Australia, Mr. Guthrie sought an interim injunction against his former employer, Visa Global Logistics Pty Ltd (VGL), to prevent or remedy the effects of his dismissal. The dispute arose from VGL's decision to dismiss Mr. Guthrie on 9 December 2019 for alleged contraventions of the company's code of conduct and a "Three Strike Policy," which Mr. Guthrie contended was a response to his exercise of workplace rights.

The court was required to determine whether there was a serious question to be tried regarding Mr. Guthrie's claim that his dismissal was motivated, in whole or in part, by a prohibited reason under the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) (FW Act). Specifically, the court needed to consider whether Mr. Guthrie's complaints and inquiries concerning flexible working arrangements, and his application to the Fair Work Commission (FWC), constituted the exercise of a workplace right under section 341(1)(c)(ii) of the FW Act, and whether these actions were a reason for his dismissal. The court also had to consider the balance of convenience in granting an interim injunction.

Lucev J noted that the legal question of what constitutes a complaint or inquiry for the purposes of section 341(1)(c)(ii) of the FW Act was not settled and that there were divergent lines of authority. However, the court found that there was a serious question to be tried, particularly given the lack of contemporaneous evidence supporting VGL's stated reasons for dismissal and the evidence suggesting a link between Mr. Guthrie's requests for flexible working arrangements, his engagement with the FWC, and the dismissal decision. The court was satisfied that Mr. Guthrie had established a serious question to be tried as to whether his dismissal was for a prohibited reason.

The court ordered that Annexure GH-1 to the First Harris Affidavit be struck out by agreement between the parties. While the court did not make final orders regarding the interim injunction in the provided text, it concluded that Mr. Guthrie had satisfied the threshold of establishing a serious question to be tried concerning a prohibited reason for his dismissal, which is a prerequisite for granting interlocutory relief.