Gramotnev v Queensland University of Technology

[2019] QCA 108

Queensland Court of Appeal

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Employment Law
2. › Termination and breach of contract
3. › Disciplinary procedures
4. › Enterprise bargaining agreement
5. › Whether employer complied with mandatory procedural steps before termination
6. › Whether employee admitted or denied allegations of misconduct
1. Contract
2. › General contractual principles
3. › Whether workplace policy forms part of employment contract
4. › Grievance resolution procedures
5. › Whether language of policy is promissory or aspirational
6. › Goldman Sachs JBWere Services Pty Ltd v Nikolich test
1. Contract
2. › Discharge, breach and defences to action for breach
3. › Repudiation
4. › What amounts to repudiation
5. › Whether employee's conduct evinced intention to fulfil contract in manner substantially inconsistent with obligations
6. › Whether employer entitled to rely on repudiation not invoked at time of termination
1. Damages
2. › Loss of opportunity
3. › Whether lost chance offered substantial and not merely speculative prospect of favourable outcome
4. › Sellars v Adelaide Petroleum NL (1994) 179 CLR 332

Quick Take

An employer may justify termination of an employment contract by relying on the employee's wrongful repudiation even where the employer did not invoke that repudiation at the time but instead relied only on a contractual right to terminate for misconduct. Workplace grievance resolution policies expressed in aspirational or commitment-based language, rather than promissory terms, do not form part of the employment contract. Where an employee claims loss of opportunity arising from breach of disciplinary procedures, the employee must establish that the chance of a favourable outcome was substantial and not merely speculative.