This matter will be listed for hearing at 2.00 p.m. on Monday 26 October 1998.

A listing of the hearing and the Directions in relation to that hearing are issued contemporaneously with this decision.

Termination of employment - unfair dismissal - applicant dismissed on basis that he was not a fit and proper person in terms of s47(4) Public Service Act 1922 in that he misrepresented his work history, supplied false information in a questionnaire and did not admit to until presented with the facts of having in his previous employment accessed a secure database and released information in breach of employer's rules - previous decision found application within jurisdiction as 12 month probation may have been reasonable given nature of position and circumstances of applicant's appointment but probationary period beyond 12 months excessive - whether termination was harsh, unjust and unreasonable - was there valid reason relating to capacity or conduct of employee - analysis of three grounds upon which respondent made determination for dismissal - whether applicant misrepresented work history in a way highly relevant to his suitability to appointment with respondent - nature of misrepresentation of concern to employer not specified - test whether applicant is pursuant to subsection 47(4) of Public Service Act wrongfully applied, this being a service-wide test rather than applicable to a specific position - Commission found that applicant did exaggerate in relation to claims regarding always acting in a professional manner however error was not wilful nor of major substance as previous employer did no more than admonish or counsel him - whether applicant supplied false information to questionnaire in matter highly relevant to suitability to remain APS officer - Commission found applicant did not answer question truthfully - applicant committed misdemeanour in previous employment about which Commission found he was contrite to respondent though noted that again he only received admonition - whether incidents of such gravity that warranted termination - whether current employer terminating an employee based on advice and/or information from previous employer constitutes valid reason - Commission found that employer did not have valid reason for termination thus not meeting test in s170CG(3)(a) - Commission found that applicant not notified of reason(s) for termination nor given opportunity to respond prior to termination as required by s170CG(3)(b) and (c) - Commission found that applicant's termination was harsh and unjust and unreasonable - reinstatement appropriate with issues of continuity and service addressed and payment of amount in respect of remuneration lost pursuant to s170CH(4) - respondent directed to lodge statements of evidence germane to s170CH(3).