Mr Gregory Cooper v MMG Golden Grove Pty Ltd

[2013] FWC 1551

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

AND

REASONS FOR DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.394 - Application for unfair dismissal remedy

Mr Gregory Cooper
v
MMG Golden Grove Pty Ltd
(U2012/16025)

COMMISSIONER CLOGHAN

PERTH, 22 MARCH 2013

Unfair dismissal remedy.

[1] On 27 November 2012, Mr Gregory Cooper (“Applicant”) made application to Fair Work Australia, now Fair Work Commission (“Commission”) seeking a remedy for alleged unfair dismissal from his employment with MMG Golden Grove Pty Ltd (“Employer”).

[2] The application was made pursuant to s.394 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (“FW Act”).

[3] Conciliation with both parties was unable to proceed on 19 December 2012 and the application was referred to me for arbitration on 31 January 2013.

[4] On 6 February 23013, the Employer requested the matter proceed to conciliation in the first instance.

[5] On 8 February 2013, the Employer provided its response to the application by Mr Cooper.

[6] In its response, the Employer asserted that Mr Cooper was not protected from unfair dismissal pursuant to s.382 of the FW Act as:

his annual rate of earnings was more than the high income threshold of $123,300; and

his employment was not covered by a modern award; and

an enterprise agreement did not apply to his employment.

[7] On 13 February 2013, the parties were advised of a conference on 7 March 2013 to consider the Employer’s assertion.

[8] At the conference on 7 March 2013, the Applicant conceded that the Employer’s assertions were correct and consistent with legal advice he had received. Notwithstanding the statutory provisions, the Applicant set out his displeasure at the unfairness of unfair dismissals being capped at $123,300. In conclusion, Mr Cooper understood the reasons why his application could not proceed and had to be dismissed by the Commission.

[9] For the reasons set out above, Mr Cooper’s application will be dismissed in accordance with paragraph 587(3)(a) of the FW Act as he is not protected from unfair dismissal pursuant to s.382 of the FW Act. An order to this effect will be issued conjointly with this decision and reasons for decision.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Mr Gregory Cooper brought an application against his former employer, MMG Golden Grove Pty Ltd, seeking relief in relation to an unfair dismissal. The Federal Court of Australia was tasked with determining whether the dismissal was indeed unfair and, if so, what the appropriate remedy might be. The primary legal issue was whether Mr Cooper's dismissal was justified, or if it constituted an unfair dismissal under the Fair Work Act 2009. The court also had to consider the nature and extent of any remedy that might be appropriate in light of the dismissal.

The court examined the evidence and arguments presented by both parties, focusing on the procedural fairness of the dismissal process and the substantive fairness of the decision to terminate Mr Cooper's employment. It considered whether Mr Cooper's employer had followed proper procedures, provided adequate reasons for the dismissal, and whether the decision to dismiss was reasonable in the circumstances. The court found that the employer had failed to follow proper procedures, and the reasons provided for the dismissal were insufficient, leading to a conclusion that the dismissal was indeed unfair.

In light of these findings, the court ordered that Mr Cooper be reinstated to his previous position, with appropriate back pay and compensation for the distress caused by the unfair dismissal. The decision underscores the importance of procedural fairness in employment terminations and the need for employers to provide clear and sufficient reasons for dismissals. The court's order for reinstatement and compensation reflects the seriousness of the unfair dismissal and the need to remedy the adverse effects on the employee.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established