Independent Education Union of Australia – Western Australian Branch

Case [2022] FWC 143


[2022] FWC 143

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009

s.512—Right of entry

Independent Education Union of Australia – Western Australian Branch

(RE2021/1290)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT GOSTENCNIK

MELBOURNE, 28 JANUARY 2022

Application for a right of entry permit for Nadia Durie Kircher– permit previously issued - permit never received – order revoking missing permit – permit reissued.

  1. The Independent Education Union of Australia (IEUA) applied under s.512 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Act) for the issue of a right of entry permit to its official, Ms Nadia Durie Kircher. The Commission subsequently issued Ms Kircher a right of entry permit which will expire on 20 December 2024.

  1. Ms Kircher’s permit is one of the 37 missing entry permits referred to in decision [2022] FWC 123. As indicated in that decision, in order for Ms Kircher to hold a valid entry permit, the missing permit must be revoked and a permit must be reissued. In order to issue a permit to Ms Kircher, I need to be satisfied that she is a fit and proper person to hold a permit under the Act taking into account the permit qualification matters. The relevant statutory considerations set out in [2022] FWC 123 are adopted here and need not be repeated.

Consideration

  1. In support of its application IEUA filed declarations by Ms Kircher and Ms Rebecca Mary Collopy, Branch Secretary (the Declarations).

Permit qualification matters – s.513(1)(a), (b), (c), (d), (e) and (f)

  1. According to the Declarations:

·   Ms Kircher has received appropriate training about the rights and responsibilities of a permit holder by undertaking a course of training on the subject of a federal right of entry conducted on 5 November 2021 (s.513(1)(a) of the Act));[1]

·   Ms Kircher has never been convicted of an offence against an industrial law (s.513(1)(b) of the Act);[2]

·   Ms Kircher has never been convicted of an offence against a law of the Commonwealth, State, Territory or a foreign country, involving conduct described in s.513(1)(c) of the Act;[3]

·   Neither Ms Kircher nor any other person has been ordered to pay a penalty under this Act or any other industrial law in relation to action taken by her (s.513(1)(d) of the Act);[4]

·   Ms Kircher  has not had any entry permit issued under Part 3-4 of the Act or a similar law of the Commonwealth revoked, suspended or had imposed conditions on any such permit (s.513(1)(e) of the Act);[5]

·   Ms Kircher  has not had cancelled, suspended or imposed conditions on any right of entry permit for industrial or occupational health and safety purposes that Ms Kircher  held under a State or Territory industrial law or a State or Territory occupational health and safety law (s.513(1)(f)(i) of the Act);[6] and

·   Ms Kircher  has not been disqualified from exercising or applying for a right of entry permit for industrial or occupational health and safety purposes under a State or Territory industrial law or a State or Territory occupational health and safety law (s.513(1)(f)(ii) of the Act).[7]

  1. I accept that the information disclosed in the Declarations concerning these matters is accurate and correct. These matters weigh in favour of a conclusion that Ms Kircher is a fit and proper person to hold a right of entry permit.

Permit qualification matters – s.513(1)(g)

  1. There are no other matters of which I am aware that I consider relevant to the determination of whether Ms Kircher  is a fit and proper person to hold an entry permit.

Conclusion

  1. Pursuant to s.603 of the Act, the entry permit formerly issued to Ms Kircher by decision of the delegate is revoked with effect from the date of this decision. A revocation order is separately issued in PR737825.

  1. Taking in account the permit qualification matters, for the reasons earlier stated I am satisfied that Ms Kircher  is a fit and proper person to hold an entry permit.

  1. A permit will be reissued to Ms Kircher separately.



DEPUTY PRESIDENT

[1] Form F42, Declaration by proposed permit holder dated 23 November 2021 at (a) and ACTU Certificate of Completion dated 5 November 2021

[2] Ibid at (b)

[3] Ibid at (c)

[4] Ibid at (d)

[5] Ibid at (e)

[6] Ibid at (f)

[7] Ibid at (g)

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<PR737731>

Details
AGLC
Independent Education Union of Australia – Western Australian Branch [2022] FWC 143
Case
[2022] FWC 143
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The matter before the court involved the Independent Education Union of Australia – Western Australian Branch, who applied for a right of entry permit for Nadia Durie Kircher. The permit had been issued previously but was never received. Consequently, an order was made to revoke the missing permit, and it was subsequently reissued. The Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia heard the case.

The legal issues before the court centered around the validity and effect of the original permit issuance, the consequences of the permit not being received, and the subsequent steps required to ensure the permit was properly reissued. The court had to determine whether the order to revoke the missing permit was valid and if the reissuance of the permit was in accordance with the law.

The court examined the circumstances surrounding the initial issuance and non-receipt of the permit. It concluded that the original issuance was valid but that the permit had not reached its intended recipient. The court found that the order revoking the missing permit was justified given the circumstances. It also determined that the subsequent reissuance of the permit was lawful and complied with the relevant legislative requirements.

The court ordered that the permit previously issued to Nadia Durie Kircher be revoked due to non-receipt. It further ordered that the permit be reissued in accordance with the applicable laws. The decision was made to ensure that the permit process was correctly followed and that the rights of the applicant were properly upheld.

Orders

Orders of the court

Full text does not contain this section.

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

Full text does not contain this section.