Callahan v Graphic Impressions [2014] FWC 437

(#P39_789) Submissions of the Applicant on reasonable notice (23/1/2014) at [15]

Fair Work Commission|2014-01-24

(#P38_722) Exhibit A 2

(#P39_789) Submissions of the Applicant on reasonable notice (23/1/2014) at [15]

(#P47_1614) Exhibit A1 at [2] - [5]

(#P48_1727) Transcript PN94-PN97

(#P49_1874) Transcript PN 118

(#P50_1956) Transcript PN 3211

(#P51_2081) Exhibit A1 at [5]

(#P52_2278) Exhibit R1

(#P53_2351) Transcript PN 129; PN 159: Exhibit R 1; Transcript PN 145

(#P54_2549) Transcript PN 83-PN84

(#P55_2671) Transcript PN 112

(#P58_2759) Transcript PN 113

(#P59_2930) Exhibit A 2

(#P60_3014) Transcript PN112-PN114

(#P61_3157) Transcript PN116; Exhibit R1 at Clause 44

(#P64_3395) Exhibit A4 at [1] - [8]

(#P65_3617) Transcript PN201-PN202

(#P70_3736) Exhibit A1 at [24]

(#P71_3846) Exhibit R5 at [20] - [21]

(#P72_4095) Ibid at [24]

(#P73_4327) Ibid at [25] - [26]

(#P79_4914) Ibid at [28]

(#P81_5326) Ibid at [29] - [32]

(#P86_5536) Exhibit R9

(#P87_5626) Ibid at [39]; exhibit R9

(#P88_5720) Exhibit R5 at [39]

(#P89_5853) Transcript PN 3275 - PN 3278

(#P90_6061) Exhibit R9 at page 2

(#P92_6543) Transcript PN 3295 - PN 3296

(#P93_6721) Transcript PN 3678, PN 3693

(#P96_7129) Transcript PN 3685 - PN 3687

(#P97_7506) See Jones v Dunkel (1959) 101 CLR 298

(#P102_7818) Transcript PN 3692 - PN 3698

(#P107_8509) exhibit R 5 at [40] - [42]

(#P109_8766) transcript PN 3697 - PN 3698

(#P110_8854) transcript PN 3699 - PN 3701

(#P111_9536) Transcript PN3695 - PN3701

(#P112_9855) See Jones v Dunkel (1959) 101 CLR 298

(#P113_10165) Transcript PN3693 - PN3697

(#P116_10280) exhibit A2

(#P130_11614) Transcript PN 2518 - PN 2534; exhibit R4, Annexure D

(#P132_12045) Transcript PN 261

(#P135_12172) Transcript PN 336

(#P136_12240) Transcript PN 337 - PN 338

(#P137_12406) Transcript PN 339 - PN 340

(#P138_12672) Transcript PN 341 - PN 343

(#P141_12767) Exhibit R7 at [1]

(#P142_12885) Transcript PN 340; exhibit R7 at [5]

(#P143_13093) Transcript PN 1982

(#P144_13194) PN 1961 - PN 1965

(#P145_13733) Transcript PN265

(#P150_14390) Transcript PN 605 - PN 610

(#P151_14533) Transcript PN 340; exhibit R7 at [5]

(#P152_14854) Transcript PN 357 - PN 382

(#P157_16026) Respondent's Final Submissions at [24]

(#P160_16495) Exhibit A1 at [25] - [26]

(#P168_17589) Transcript PN 524 - PN 529

(#P180_19700) Transcript PN 868 - PN 876

(#P183_20335) Respondent's Final Submissions at [24]

(#P184_20670) Transcript PN 873 - PN 874

(#P185_21181) Exhibit R4 Annexure K

(#P188_21529) Respondent's Final Submissions at [25]

(#P191_21871) Exhibit A1 at [11]

(#P192_21965) Exhibit A1 at [12]; I note that Ms Thornton gave evidence that she commenced operating the business of Genuine Print in 2005 (exhibit A4 of [5]) but as nothing turns on the date on which that business commence I do not need to resolve the conflict of evidence

(#P193_22605) Exhibit A1 at [14]

(#P194_22834) Exhibit A1 at [16]

(#P197_23015) Exhibit A 4 at [12]

(#P200_23468) Transcript PN 354

(#P203_24036) Transcript PN 3520 - PN 3525

(#P204_24410) See Briginshaw v Briginshaw (1938) 60 CLR 366

(#P220_27485) Transcript PN 566- PN 576

(#P225_28042) Respondent's Final Submissions at [25(b)]

(#P226_28312) See [16] of these reasons

(#P227_28537) Transcript PN 605 - PN 615

(#P230_28663) Respondent's Final Submissions at [25(c)]

(#P231_28975) Transcript PN 410 - PN 424

(#P234_29486) Transcript PN 1038

(#P235_29882) Exhibit A 2

(#P236_30047) Transcript PN 3525

(#P241_30854) Exhibit R4

(#P242_31300) Transcript PN 919 - PN 921

(#P243_31457) Transcript PN 921 - PN 924

(#P244_31683) Transcript PN 1031 - PN 1037

(#P245_31911) Transcript PN 1035

(#P248_33072) See the list of clients at transcript PN 1032 - PN 1035

(#P251_33341) Applicant's final submissions at [26]

(#P252_33493) Transcript PN 385

(#P253_33664) Transcript PN 386 - PN 388

(#P258_34737) See exhibit A2

(#P259_34986) Transcript PN 3708 - PN 3711

(#P262_35083) Exhibit R8 at [8]

(#P263_35296) Exhibit R8 at [9]

(#P264_35409) Transcript PN 2941 - PN 2943

(#P265_35638) Transcript PN 2835

(#P266_35780) Transcript PN 204

(#P269_36167) Transcript PN 2896

(#P270_36367) Transcript PN 2902 - 2903

(#P271_36612) Transcript PN 3297

(#P278_38035) Transcript PN 3297 - PN 3300

(#P283_38734) Exhibit R 8 at [4] - [6]

(#P288_40664) Transcript PN 224

(#P291_41377) Exhibit R2

(#P292_41452) Transcript PN 244

(#P293_41661) Exhibit R2 at p. 1

(#P294_41824) Exhibit R2 at p. 2

(#P297_43211) See for example Federal Supply and Cold Storage Co of South Africa v Angehrn (1910) 103 LT 150; Martin v South Australia (1982) 49 SAIR to 69; McCasker v Darling DownsCo-op Bacon Association (1988) 25 IR 107 and Australasian Transport Officers Association v Department of Motor Transport (1988) 25 IR 235

(#P300_43795) See for example John Lysaght (Australia) Ltd v Federated Ironworkers; Re York (1972) 14 AILR 57 and McCasker v Darling DownsCo-op Bacon Association (1988) 25 IR 107

(#P305_44907) Exhibit R7 at [14] - [26]

(#P306_45308) Transcript PN 3317 - PN 3335

(#P309_45576) Transcript PN 2569 - PN 2587

(#P380_50228) Sayer v Melsteel [2011] FWAFB 7498

(#P383_50406) (1995) 185 CLR 410 at 465

(#P388_51198) See Final Submissions of the Applicant

(#P400_52522) See Respondent's Final Submissions

(#P416_54915) Shepherd v Felt & Textiles of Australia Ltd [1931] HCA 21; (1931) 45 CLR 359 at 373, 377-378

(#P417_55057) Selvachandran v Peteron Plastics Pty Ltd (1995) 62 IR 371 at 373

(#P418_55194) Selvachandran v Peteron Plastics Pty Ltd (1995) 62 IR 371 at 373

(#P419_55479) King v Freshmore (Vic) Pty Ltd, Full Bench AIRC, 17 March 2000, (Print S4213)

(#P420_55622) Australian Meat Holdings Pty Ltd v McLauchlan (1998) 88 IR 1

(#P423_55980) Transcript PN 341 - PN 343

(#P440_59779) Transcript PN 3587 - PN 3509

(#P449_60787) Chubb Security Australia Pty Ltd v Thomas Print S2679 at [41]

(#P450_60869) Crozier v Palazzo Corporation Pty Ltd (2000) 98 IR 137 at 151

(#P451_60963) Previsic v Australian Quarantine Inspection Services Print Q3730

(#P452_61071) (2000) 98 IR 137

(#P455_61798) (2000) 98 IR 137 at 151

(#P464_63472) RMIT v Asher (2010) 194 IR 1 at 14-15

(#P465_63555) [2013] FWCFB 9196

(#P467_64512) Ibid at [4]

(#P476_65909) See also Explanatory Memorandum to the Fair Work Bill 2008 at [1542]

(#P483_66947) Annetta v Ansett Australia (2000) 98 IR 233 at 237

(#P490_68643) See exhibit A2

(#P503_69940) Exhibit R1

(#P504_70104) Ibid at clause 10; see also dispute resolution procedure at clause 26

(#P505_70244) Ibid at clause 1

(#P538_72785) Applicant's submissions dated 29 August 2013 at [20] - [23]

(#P539_72910) Applicant's final submissions at [74] - [75]

(#P540_73444) Respondent's final submissions at [86]

(#P546_74220) Section 381(1)(c)

(#P550_75315) The then Australian Industrial Relations Commission could make an award that provided a remedy of a kind that could be granted by the Court under section 170EE of the IR Act if the parties made an election to have the matter dealt with by content arbitration; see section 170EC of the IR Act

(#P555_76504) See generally subdivision B of Division 3 of Part VIA of the WR Act

(#P562_78026) (1998) 84 IR 1

(#P563_78482) Ibid at 17

(#P568_79281) Such discovery might also be relied upon by the employer as a valid reason for the employee's dismissal which is the subject of an unfair dismissal remedy application

(#P569_79589) Chelvarajah v Global Protection Pty Ltd [2004] FCA 1661; (2004) 142 FCR 296

(#P570_79805) Ibid; See also Smith v Capral Aluminium, 7 October 1999 Print R9808; Fairhall v Smorgon, 22 February 2002, PR913285

(#P571_80142) Newtronics Pty Ltd v Salenga, AIRC Full Bench 29 April 1999, Print R4305

(#P574_80428) See for example Smith v Moore Paragon AIRC Full Bench 20 January 2004, PR942856

(#P577_81141) See most recently in Commonwealth Bank of Australia v Barker [2013] FCAFC 83; per Jacobson and Lander JJ at [77]-[108]; C/f Per Jessup J at [236]-[340]; On 16 December 2013 the CBA was granted special leave to appeal this decision in the High Court of Australia

(#P580_81711) See Tenix Defence Pty Ltd v Galea, PR928494, 11 March 2003; see also Liddell v Lembke (1994) 1 IRCR 466, per Gray J at 495 and Abbott-Etherington v Houghton Motors Pty Limited (1995) 63 IR 394, per Marshall J at 396-397

(#P581_82034) [2000] FCA 627

(#P582_82393) Ibid at [42]

(#P592_84909) (1997) 72 IR 186

(#P595_88855) Ibid at 191

(#P598_89112) (1998) 84 IR 1 at 18

(#P599_89259) [2010] FWAFB 8753

(#P602_89779) Ibid at [26]

(#P678_98829) [2013] FWCFB 431

(#P679_99087) (1998) 88 IR 21

(#P680_99150) Print S5109

(#P689_101139) Respondent's submissions on reasonable period of notice (23/1/2014) at [d]

(#P692_102047) Exhibit R1

(#P693_102213) On 16 January 2014 my associate wrote to the parties asking them to confirm whether shareholders deed was the only written document setting out employment arrangement between the Applicant and the Respondent, that it is silent question of notice of termination, that the contract of employment was therefore partly written partly oral and partly to be implied, and that it was silent on the question of notice. On 20 January 2014 the Applicant and the Respondent each confirmed that this was the case.

(#P696_103418) Byrne v Australian Airlines Ltd (1995) 185 CLR 410 at 449 - 450 per McHugh and Gummow JJ

(#P697_103625) Respondent's submission on reasonable period of notice (23/2/2014) at [c]

(#P700_103888) Exhibit R1

(#P703_104420) Section 117(2)

(#P706_105477) Applicant's submisisons on reasonable notice (23/1/2014) at [11]

(#P707_105754) Respondent's submissions on reasonable notice (23/1/2014) at [c]

(#P710_106273) See Quinn v Jack Chia (Australia) Ltd [1992] VicRp 37; [1992] 1 VR 567 at 580; Logan v Otis Elevator Co Pty Ltd [1999] IRCA 4; (1999) 94 IR 218 at 229 and Rankin v Marine Power International Pty Ltd [2001] VSC 150; (2001) 107 IR 117 at 140

(#P711_106674) IOOF Building Society Pty Ltd v Foxeden Pty Ltd [2009] VSCA 138; (2009) 23 VR 536

(#P714_106936) Quinn v Jack Chia (Australia) Ltd [1992] VicRp 37; [1992] 1 VR 567 at 580

(#P718_107060) Rankin v Marine Power International Pty Ltd [2001] VSC 150; (2001) 107 IR 117 at 140

(#P720_107164) O'Donnell v GIO Australia Ltd (1995) 64 IR 297 at 303; Brookton Holdings No V Pty Ltd v Kara Kar Holdings Pty Ltd (1994) 57 IR 288 at 290 - 291

(#P722_107352) Hill v CA Parsons Ltd [1971] 3 WLR 995 at 999

(#P724_107446) Ibid; Quinn v Jack Chia (Australia) Ltd [1992] VicRp 37; [1992] 1 VR 567 at 580

(#P726_107539) Quinn v Jack Chia (Australia) Ltd [1992] VicRp 37; [1992] 1 VR 567 at 580; Rankin v Marine Power International Pty Ltd [2001] VSC 150; (2001) 107 IR 117 at 140

(#P728_107722) O'Donnell v GIO Australia Ltd (1995) 64 IR 297 at 303; Rankin v Marine Power International Pty Ltd [2001] VSC 150; (2001) 107 IR 117 at 140

(#P730_107890) O'Donnell v GIO Australia Ltd (1995) 64 IR 297 at 303; Rankin v Marine Power International Pty Ltd [2001] VSC 150; (2001) 107 IR 117 at 139

(#P732_108094) Grout v Gunnedah Shire Council (No 1) (1994) 57 IR 243 at 250 - 251; Birrell v Australian National Airlines commission [1984] FCA 378; (1984) 5 FCR 447 at 458; Grout v Gunnedah Shire Council (No 2) (1995) 58 IR 67 at 79

(#P734_108407) Grout v Gunnedah Shire Council (No 2) (1995) 58 IR 67 at 79; Quinn v Jack Chia (Australia) Ltd [1992] VicRp 37; [1992] 1 VR 567 at 580

(#P736_108630) Quinn v Jack Chia (Australia) Ltd [1992] VicRp 37; [1992] 1 VR 567 at 580

(#P738_108746) Hill v CA Parsons Ltd [1971] 3 WLR 995

(#P742_109277) Exhibit A1 at [5]

(#P743_110488) The former is more likely than the latter as the contract did not provide for payment in lieu of notice, and payment in lieu instead of allowing the Applicant to work out the notice period would likely be a breach of the contract.

(#P758_111909) Respondent's final submissions at [87 (g)] and [82] - [84]

(#P767_113428) Respondent's final submissions at [87(a)]

(#P768_113657) Exhibit R2 at p.2

(#P769_113768) Ibid at p.3

(#P778_114887) Transcript PN52 - PN54

(#P779_115309) Respondent's final submissions at [87(d)]

(#P806_118106) Exhibit A1

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

At a glance

Court

Decision date

Source

Judgment (200 paragraphs)

Parties

Legislation Cited (3)

Cases Cited (26)