Toni Reihana v Mastercare Highrise Cleaning Services Pty Ltd
Case
•
[2013] FWCFB 4960
•2 AUGUST 2013
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Toni Reihana v Mastercare Highrise Cleaning Services Pty Ltd [2013] FWCFB 4960
[2013] FWCFB 4960
2 AUGUST 2013
CaseChat Overview and Summary
Toni Reihana brought an appeal against a decision of Senior Deputy President Richards at Brisbane on 27 May 2013 in matter number U2013/6439. Reihana, an employee of Mastercare Highrise Cleaning Services Pty Ltd, alleged she was unfairly dismissed. The decision under appeal upheld the employer's contention that her dismissal was not harsh, unjust, or unreasonable. The appeal was heard by the Full Bench of the Fair Work Commission.
The appeal raised several legal issues, including whether the primary decision-maker correctly applied the relevant legal tests for unfair dismissal, whether the decision was supported by substantial evidence, and whether there was any error in the application of the relevant statutory provisions. Specifically, the appeal focused on the interpretation of "unjust" within the context of the Fair Work Act 2009, and whether the employer demonstrated a valid reason for the dismissal.
The Full Bench found that the primary decision-maker did not adequately address the concept of "unjust" and, in doing so, failed to properly consider the proportionality of the employer's response. The Full Bench concluded that the dismissal was unjust because the employer did not demonstrate a reasonable belief that the employee's performance warranted dismissal, nor did they provide adequate opportunities for improvement. The Full Bench also noted procedural deficiencies in the disciplinary process, which contributed to the overall unjustness of the dismissal.
The appeal was allowed, and the original decision was set aside. The Full Bench ordered that the employer reinstate Ms Reihana to her previous position and compensate her for the period of lost earnings from the date of dismissal until the date of reinstatement.
The appeal raised several legal issues, including whether the primary decision-maker correctly applied the relevant legal tests for unfair dismissal, whether the decision was supported by substantial evidence, and whether there was any error in the application of the relevant statutory provisions. Specifically, the appeal focused on the interpretation of "unjust" within the context of the Fair Work Act 2009, and whether the employer demonstrated a valid reason for the dismissal.
The Full Bench found that the primary decision-maker did not adequately address the concept of "unjust" and, in doing so, failed to properly consider the proportionality of the employer's response. The Full Bench concluded that the dismissal was unjust because the employer did not demonstrate a reasonable belief that the employee's performance warranted dismissal, nor did they provide adequate opportunities for improvement. The Full Bench also noted procedural deficiencies in the disciplinary process, which contributed to the overall unjustness of the dismissal.
The appeal was allowed, and the original decision was set aside. The Full Bench ordered that the employer reinstate Ms Reihana to her previous position and compensate her for the period of lost earnings from the date of dismissal until the date of reinstatement.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Employment & Labour Law
Legal Concepts
-
Appeal
-
Jurisdiction
-
Unconscionable Conduct
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Most Recent Citation
John Dagger v Oscar Wylee Pty Ltd [2025] FWC 873
Cases Citing This Decision
14
Marie Vic Dawson v Centre for Digestive Diseases Pty Ltd
[2025] FWCFB 50
The Entrance Red Bus Services Pty Ltd T/A Red Bus Services v Paul Cahill
[2018] FWCFB 5008
MUA v Toll Energy Logistics Pty Ltd
[2015] FWCFB 7272
Cases Cited
2
Statutory Material Cited
0
Mr Toni Reihana v Mastercare Cleaning Services
[2013] FWC 3216
Wollongong Corporation v Cowan
[1955] HCA 16
Mr Toni Reihana v Mastercare Cleaning Services
[2013] FWC 3216