unfair dismissaldesignated agentreinstatementdamagestermination of employment
Tags
unlawful terminationreinstatementdamages in lieu of reinstatement
legislation
Statutes Cited
P
o
l
i
c
e
a
n
d
C
r
i
m
i
n
a
l
E
v
i
d
e
n
c
e
A
c
t
1
9
8
4
R
e
g
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
I
n
v
e
s
t
i
g
a
t
o
r
y
P
o
w
e
r
s
A
c
t
2
0
0
0
H
u
m
a
n
R
i
g
h
t
s
A
c
t
1
9
9
8
E
u
r
o
p
e
a
n
C
o
n
v
e
n
t
i
o
n
o
n
H
u
m
a
n
R
i
g
h
t
s
(
A
r
t
6
)
ai analysis
Case Summary
Key Issues
{"issue_text":"Whether the termination of appellant's employment was fair or lawful","issue_type":"mixed","dispositive":"yes","related_facts":"Termination on 28 December 2020, Designated Agent found unlawful"}
{"issue_text":"Whether the appellant is owed outstanding terminal benefits","issue_type":"law","dispositive":"no","related_facts":"Designated Agent awarded US$2,563.56"}
This summary was generated by AI. Use Zalari to read the full judgment.
background
Facts of the Case
Background
The appellant's employment was terminated on 28 December 2020. A Designated Agent determined that the termination was unlawful and awarded terminal benefits of US$2,563.56. The appellant appealed against this determination, arguing that the primary remedy of reinstatement should have been granted.
Read the full judgment, get AI analysis, and find related cases