Rasia v University of Sydney

In the case of Rasia v University of Sydney, the dispute centred on whether the university had acted reasonably in relation to a performance appraisal, disciplinary action, and the subsequent dismissal of Mr Rasia. The matter was heard by the Industrial Commission of New South Wales. The central legal issue was whether the university had taken reasonable action concerning Mr Rasia's performance appraisal, discipline, or dismissal. Specifically, the court needed to determine if the university's actions were in accordance with section 11A of the Workers Compensation Act 1987. Additionally, the court was tasked with reviewing the Arbitrator’s findings of fact regarding the credibility of the witnesses and the requirements for proving actual bias.

The court examined the evidence presented and the adherence to Practice Direction No 6, which outlines the process for introducing new evidence on appeal. The court noted that the applicant, Mr Rasia, had failed to strictly comply with the requirements for introducing additional documentary evidence, particularly in demonstrating that the evidence could not have been obtained with reasonable diligence. The court found that the evidence presented by Mr Rasia did not meet the criteria for admission under the Practice Direction. Consequently, the court confirmed the Arbitrator’s determination and made no order regarding the costs of the appeal.