Manpreet Kaur v Western Health - [2025] FWC 2191

[2025] FWC 2191

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009

s.394 - Application for unfair dismissal remedy

Manpreet Kaur
v

Western Health

(U2024/13990)

COMMISSIONER TRAN

MELBOURNE, 5 AUGUST 2025

Application for an unfair dismissal remedy – Misconduct – Valid reason for dismissal – Dismissal not unfair, harsh, unjust or unreasonable – Application dismissed.

Ms Manpreet Kaur was employed as a Registered Nurse by Western Health. Western Health is a large public health service in the western suburbs of Melbourne. It operates multiple hospitals, including Sunshine Hospital, and health care services. Ms Kaur worked in the Sunshine Hospital Emergency Department. On 31 October 2024, Western Health dismissed Ms Kaur as it “no longer has trust and confidence in [her] ability” following an incident in July 2024 when Ms Kaur accidentally defibrillated a patient. Ms Kaur says that the dismissal was unfair because it followed months of bullying, harassment and micromanagement, and the defibrillation incident was unintentional.

Ms Kaur applied for an unfair dismissal remedy under s 394 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth). She did so within the required timeframe of 21 days after the dismissal took effect.

Having considered the evidence and submissions of the parties, I am satisfied that Western Health’s dismissal of Ms Kaur was for a valid reason, it followed a fair procedure and is not otherwise harsh, unjust or unreasonable. I therefore dismiss the application. My reasons follow.

Ms Kaur is Protected from Unfair Dismissal

I am satisfied that Ms Kaur is a person who is protected from unfair dismissal.
-     Ms Kaur completed the minimum period of employment required by s 383(a). Western Health is not a small business employer, and Ms Kaur had more than 6 months continuous service with Western Health
-     At the time of her dismissal, Ms Kaur was covered by the Nurses and Midwives (Victorian Public Sector) (Single Interest Employers) Enterprise Agreement 2020-2024[1] and her annual earnings were less than the high-income threshold.
-     There is no dispute that Western Health dismissed Ms Kaur within the meaning of s 386.
-     Ms Kaur’s dismissal was not a case of genuine redundancy within the meaning of s 389.

Procedural Background

I held a hearing on 5 and 6 March 2025.

The parties filed submissions and a significant amount of documentary materials. I do not detail all the materials, but I have considered all the relevant evidence in reaching my decision.

Ms Kaur gave evidence on her own behalf.

Western Health relied on the witness evidence of:

·   Ms Nicole Davies, Director Nursing and Midwifery
·   Dr Alyza Gossat, Emergency Registrar
·   Ms Nicole Cook, Education Coordinator
·   Ms Caroline Hassell, Clinical Nurse Educator
·   Ms Louise Cooke, Nurse Unit Manager
·   Dr Megan Robb, Clinical Service Director

Western Health also filed witness statements for the following witnesses, but did not call and so did not rely upon the evidence of:

· Mr Chris Poropat, Acting Nurse Unit Manager; and
· Mr…

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.

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Manpreet Kaur v Western Health and more:

Read every judgment in full
Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
Download judgments as PDF or Word

Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details

Case: [2025] FWC 2191
Decision Date: 5 AUGUST 2025

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Manpreet Kaur was employed by Western Health as a Registered Nurse. Western Health dismissed Ms Kaur on 31 October 2024, stating that it no longer had trust and confidence in her ability following an incident in July 2024 when Ms Kaur accidentally defibrillated a patient. Ms Kaur applied for an unfair dismissal remedy under s 394 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth). Commissioner Tran dismissed the application. Ms Kaur was protected from unfair dismissal, and Western Health had valid reasons for dismissing her. Western Health followed a fair procedure, and the dismissal was not otherwise harsh, unjust or unreasonable. Commissioner Tran found that Ms Kaur's conduct during the defibrillation incident was a valid reason for dismissal. Western Health's concerns about Ms Kaur's ongoing inability to perform at the required standard of a Registered Nurse undertaking post-graduate critical care training were also valid reasons. Western Health had warned Ms Kaur about her unsatisfactory performance before dismissing her, and Ms Kaur was given an opportunity to respond to the reasons for her dismissal. Commissioner Tran found that the dismissal was not harsh, unjust or unreasonable. The Commissioner dismissed Ms Kaur's application for an unfair dismissal remedy.

Orders