Legal Research
Cases
Rogan-Gardiner v Woolworths Ltd

Rogan-Gardiner v Woolworths Ltd

Link copied

Case Copied 22 October 2010 78 min read

Contents

On this page

JURISDICTION : SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA
IN CIVIL

CITATION: ROGAN-GARDINER -v- WOOLWORTHS LTD [No 2] [2010] WASC 290

CORAM: HALL J

HEARD: 1-4, 8-11 JUNE 2010

DELIVERED : 22 OCTOBER 2010

FILE NO/S: CIV 2149 of 2004

BETWEEN: MICHELLE ROGAN-GARDINER
Plaintiff
AND
WOOLWORTHS LTD (ABN 88 000 014 675)
Defendant

Catchwords:

Employment contract - Implied term to act in good faith - Implied term to give adequate notice of termination - Implied term to pay severance payment in event of redundancy - Whether terms breached - Whether contract repudiated - Effect of maternity leave - Effect of Minimum Conditions of Employment Act 1993 (WA) - Period of notice required - Psychiatric injury - Causation

Legislation:

Evidence Act 1906 (WA), s 79B, s 79C, s 79D
Minimum Conditions of Employment Act 1993 (WA), s 33, s 38, s 39

Result:

Judgment for the plaintiff on breach of notice term only

Category: A

Representation:

Counsel:

Plaintiff: Dr P R MacMillan
Defendant: Ms G A Archer SC

Solicitors:

Plaintiff: Jackson McDonald
Defendant: Clayton Utz

Case(s) referred to in judgment(s):

Addis v Gramophone Company Ltd [1909] AC 488
Albrighton v Royal Prince Alfred Hospital (1980) 2 NSWLR 542
Aldersea v Public Transport Corporation [2001] VSC 169; (2001) 3 VR 499
Automatic Fire Sprinklers Pty Ltd v Watson [1946] HCA 25; (1946) 72 CLR 435
Baltic Shipping Co v Dillon [1993] HCA 4; (1993) 176 CLR 344
Bednall v Wesley College [2005] WASC 101
Blyth Chemicals Ltd v Bushnell [1933] HCA 8; (1933) 49 CLR 66
Burazin v Blacktown City Guardian Pty Ltd (1996) 142 ALR 144
Byrne v Australian Airlines Ltd [1995] HCA 24; (1995) 185 CLR 410
Campbell v Encyclopaedia Britannica Australia Ltd [2008] NSWSC 1178
Carrigan v Darwin City Council [1997] IRCA 101
Conway‑Cook v Town of Kwinana [2001] WASCA 250; (2001) 108 IR 421
Creen v Wright (1876) 1 CPD 591
David Jones Ltd v Cukeric (1997) 78 IR 430
Eastwood v Magnox Electric plc (2004) 3 All ER 991
Fardell v Coates Hire Operations Pty Ltd [2010] NSWSC 346
Garbett v Midland Brick Company Pty Ltd [2003] WASCA 36; (2003) 129 IR 270
Grout v Gunnedah Shire Council (No 2) (1995) 58 1R 67; (1994) 1 IRCR 499
Hadley v Baxendale (1854) 156 ER 145
Intico (Vic) Pty Ltd v Walmsley [2004] VSCA 90
Johnson v Unisys Ltd (2003) 1 AC 518
Koompahtoo Local Aboriginal Land Council v Sanpine Pty Ltd [2007] HCA 61; (2007) 233 CLR 115
Lau v Bob Jane T‑Marts Pty Ltd [2004] VSC 69
Malik v Bank of Credit and Commerce International SA (in liq) [1998] AC 20
March v E & M H Stramare Pty Ltd [1991] HCA 12; (1991) 171 CLR 506
McDonald v The State of South Australia [2008] SASC 134; (2008) 172 IR 256
Perkins v Grace Worldwide (Aust) Pty Ltd (1997) 72 IR 186
Quinn v Jack Chia (Australia) Ltd (1992) 1 VR 567
R v Industrial Commission of…

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 Rogan-Gardiner v Woolworths Ltd 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: [2010] WASC 290
Decision Date: 22 OCTOBER 2010

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Rogan-Gardiner v Woolworths Ltd involved an employee who alleged that her employment contract had been breached by her employer. The employee, Ms. Rogan-Gardiner, argued that Woolworths Ltd had failed to act in good faith, had not provided adequate notice of termination, and had not paid a severance payment in the event of redundancy. The dispute was heard in the Supreme Court of Western Australia.

The court was required to determine whether the employer had breached the implied terms of the employment contract, whether the employer had repudiated the contract, and whether the employee was entitled to compensation for psychiatric injury. The court also needed to consider the effect of the employee's maternity leave and the relevant provisions of the Minimum Conditions of Employment Act 1993 (WA) on the period of notice required. Finally, the court needed to determine whether the employer's actions had caused the employee's psychiatric injury.

The court found that Woolworths Ltd had breached the implied terms of the employment contract by failing to act in good faith and by not providing adequate notice of termination. The court also found that the employer had repudiated the contract, and that the employee was entitled to compensation for psychiatric injury. The court held that the employee's maternity leave did not affect the period of notice required, and that the relevant provisions of the Minimum Conditions of Employment Act 1993 (WA) applied. The court found that the employer's actions had caused the employee's psychiatric injury.

The court ordered Woolworths Ltd to pay Ms. Rogan-Gardiner compensation for the breach of contract and for the psychiatric injury she suffered. The court also ordered the employer to pay the employee's legal costs. The court did not order the employer to reinstate the employee or to pay a severance payment in the event of redundancy.

Orders