TASMANIAN INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION

Industrial Relations Act 1984
s.29 application for hearing of industrial dispute

Amanda Peta Connolly
(T9387 of 2001)

and

Hari's Investment Co. Pty Ltd
trading as Montezumas Mexican Restaurant

Industrial dispute - alleged unfair termination of employment - alleged breach of award - order issued

REASONS FOR DECISION

On 23 January 2001, Amanda Peta Connolly (the applicant) applied to the President, pursuant to Section 29(1A) of the Industrial Relations Act 1984, for a hearing before a Commissioner in respect of an industrial dispute with Hari's Investment Co. Pty Ltd trading as Montezumas Mexican Restaurant arising out of the alleged unfair termination of her employment and an alleged breach of an award.

On 21 January 2001 the President convened a hearing before myself at the Supreme Court, Cameron Street, Launceston to commence at 2.30pm on Wednesday 21 February 2001.

When this application came on for hearing Ms J Dunn, of the Launceston Community Legal Centre Inc., together with Mr P Quinn, appeared for the applicant. Mr E Stewart, a solicitor, sought and was granted leave to appear for the employer.

Following preliminary submissions the hearing was adjourned into private conference in an effort to find a resolution to the dispute.

At the conclusion of the conference the parties advised that an agreement had been reached as to the settlement of the application. This would be formalised through the execution of a Deed of Release with the Commission to be advised when this was completed.

By facsimile dated 26 April 2001 Ms Dunn advised:

"The employer now being unwilling to finalise settlement, the applicant requests that the matter be relisted."

By correspondence dated 2 May 2001, Mr Stewart advised:

"Thank you for the notice of hearing.

I have forwarded a copy to Hari's Investment Co. Pty Ltd at Johnson Breward, Level 1, 10 Cameron Street, Launceston which is the registered office of the company. With the covering letter I have indicated that having had no response to my letter of 19 April 2001, I consider myself without instructions and will not be appearing on the employer's behalf at the relisted hearing on 8 May 2001."

When the matter resumed on 8 May the employer was not represented. Ms Dunn tabled a Deed of Release dated 28 February 2001. I understand that this deed was prepared by Mr Stewart on behalf of the employer. Ms Dunn advised that the deed had been signed by the applicant but she had had no success in obtaining the monetary settlement.

This turn of events is particularly disappointing given the "good faith" agreement reached at the earlier hearing. In the absence of any explanation on the part of the employer, I have no alternative but to convert the monetary component of the deed into an Order for compensation. I wish to make it clear that this implies no criticism of Mr Stewart who at all times acted in good faith.

ORDER

Pursuant to Section 31(1B) of the Act I hereby order that Hari's Investment Co. Pty Ltd pay to Amanda Peta Connolly, C/- Phillip Quinn, 12 Picasso Place, Newnham, Tasmania 7250, the sum of one thousand one hundred and fifty dollars [$1150] by bank cheque, such payment to be made by 5.00pm on Friday 25 May 2001.

Tim Abey
COMMISSIONER

Appearances:
Ms J Dunn, of the Launceston Community Legal Centre Inc., with Mr P Quinn, for Ms A Connolly.
Mr E Stewart, a solicitor, with Mr F Anis, for Hari's Investment Co. Pty Ltd trading as Montezumas Mexican Restaurant (21/2/01 only).

Date and Place of Hearing:
2001
February 21
May 8
Launceston