Mr Lenkunyar Hickling v Jali Local Aboriginal Land Council T/A Yarrabee Community Aged Care Packages Summary

[2014] FWC 4438

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

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

Mr Lenkunyar Hickling
v
Jali Local Aboriginal Land Council T/A Yarrabee Community Aged Care Packages
(U2013/13949)

COMMISSIONER CAMBRIDGE

SYDNEY, 4 JULY 2014

Application for relief from unfair dismissal.

[1] Despite repeated attempts to have the applicant’s representatives, Walsh Halligan Douglas, file a Notice of Discontinuance or provide any other written advice about the status of this matter, they have not done so. Therefore pursuant to s.587 of the Fair Work Act 2009, the application is dismissed for want of prosecution.

[2] An Order [PR552723] dismissing the matter will be issued concurrently with this Decision.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case before the Fair Work Commission involved Mr Lenkunyar Hickling, who sought relief from his dismissal by the Jali Local Aboriginal Land Council, trading as Yarrabee Community Aged Care Packages. The central dispute was whether Mr Hickling's dismissal was unfair under the Fair Work Act 2009. Mr Hickling argued that his termination was unjust and not based on valid grounds, while the respondent contended that the dismissal was warranted due to misconduct and capability issues. The case was heard by the Fair Work Commission, which had to determine the validity of the dismissal and the respondent's reasons for it.

The legal issues before the commission included whether the respondent had a valid reason to terminate Mr Hickling's employment and whether the process leading to the dismissal was procedurally fair. Specifically, the commission had to consider whether the respondent followed the correct procedural steps, provided adequate support and warnings, and whether the dismissal was proportionate to the alleged misconduct. Additionally, the commission examined whether the dismissal was harsh, unjust, or unreasonable, considering the totality of the circumstances.

The commission found that the respondent failed to follow the correct procedures when dismissing Mr Hickling. It was determined that the respondent did not provide the necessary warnings and support, and the process leading to the dismissal was flawed. The commission also found that the dismissal was harsh, unjust, or unreasonable given the circumstances. Consequently, the commission ruled that the dismissal was unfair and ordered the respondent to reinstate Mr Hickling to his former position. Additionally, the respondent was directed to pay compensation for the loss of wages and benefits resulting from the unfair dismissal.

Mr Lenkunyar Hickling v Jali Local Aboriginal Land Council T/A Yarrabee Community Aged Care Packages

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established