Fagan v Minister for Corrective Services

[2024] WASCA 167

Western Australia Court of Appeal

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Industrial Law
2. › Western Australian Industrial Relations Commission
3. › Appeal to Industrial Appeal Court
4. › Jurisdiction under s 90(1)(b)
5. › Whether error in construction or interpretation of Act
6. › Whether grounds alleging irrelevant considerations or irrationality raise error of statutory construction
7. › Industrial Relations Act 1979 (WA), s 90(1)(b)
1. Industrial Law
2. › Western Australian Industrial Relations Commission
3. › Statutory obligations of Commission
4. › Section 26(1)(a) and s 26(1)(b)
5. › Meaning of 'according to equity, good conscience, and the substantial merits of the case'
6. › Whether provisions confer jurisdiction or merely regulate manner of exercise
7. › Industrial Relations Act 1979 (WA), s 26(1)(a), s 26(1)(b)
1. Industrial Law
2. › Unfair dismissal
3. › Harsh, oppressive or unfair dismissal
4. › Relevant considerations
5. › Whether facts arising after date of dismissal may be taken into account
6. › Disparity of treatment between employees
7. › Whether co-worker employed by different employer under different statutory framework is appropriate comparator
8. › Industrial Relations Act 1979 (WA), s 23A, s 29(1)(c)
1. Industrial Law
2. › Western Australian Industrial Relations Commission
3. › Appeal to Full Bench under s 49
4. › Nature of appeal by way of rehearing
5. › Application of doctrine of precedent
6. › Industrial Relations Act 1979 (WA), s 49

Quick Take

A ground of appeal to the Industrial Appeal Court alleging that the Full Bench took into account an irrelevant consideration or failed to take into account a relevant consideration does not raise an error in the construction or interpretation of s 26(1)(a) or s 26(1)(b) of the Industrial Relations Act 1979 (WA) within the meaning of s 90(1)(b), and such an appeal is incompetent.