referred to herein. Please submit your views in writing by close of business Monday, 28 June 2010 to the Commission. The Commission requests the to provide a copy of their submission to the v similarly the to the
Not yet cited by other cases
APPLICANT: referred to herein. Please submit your views in writing by close of business Monday, 28 June 2010 to the Commission. The Commission requests the respondent to provide a copy of their submission to the
RESPONDENT: similarly the applicant to the
This case hasn't been analysed yet.
Sign in to analyse
Generate ratio, outcome, key facts, concept tags and cited-case edges. Takes ~15–30 seconds.
Authority signal
Not yet cited by other cases
Signal-weighted score: 0.0
Derived from how later decisions have treated this case. Dark green = leading authority,
green = positively treated, grey = neutral or sparse data,
amber = caution, red = treated negatively.
Concept tags · 5
Cases cited in this decision · 1
Cited
[2010] WAIRC 782
(not in corpus)
"…ommission. The Commission requests the respondent to provide a copy of their submission to the applicant and similarly the applicant to the respondent. 6 The present proceedings stand adjourned. 1562 WESTERN...…"
Archived text (369 words)
WESTERN AUSTRALIAN INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS COMMISSION PARTIES SUSAN TAYLOR APPLICANT -v- IEUAN LAKAY OF LAKAY AND ASSOCIATES TRUST TA SWAN VALLEY PHYSIOTHERAPY RESPONDENT CORAM COMMISSIONER S M MAYMAN HEARD FRIDAY, 18 JUNE 2010 DELIVERED MONDAY, 21 JUNE 2010 FILE NO. B 49 OF 2010 CITATION NO. 2010 WAIRC 00364 CatchWords Section 29(1)(b)(ii) – Claim amended Result Preliminary reasons issued. Representation Applicant Ms S Taylor Respondent No appearance Preliminary Reasons for Decision 1 When the s 29(1)(b)(ii) application was received from Mrs Susan Taylor (the applicant) she asserted the contractual entitlement denied her by Mr Ieuan Lakay of Lakay and Associates Trust trading as Swan Valley Physiotherapy (the respondent) was limited to an annual leave entitlement of 68.12 hours, a gross amount of $2,292.24. 2 During the hearing on 18 June 2010 the applicant sought to amend her claim to include, in addition to the annual leave entitlement, a claim for two weeks’ wages in lieu of notice. The Commission accepted the application to amend the claim. 3 The claim for payment in lieu of notice is now a relevant consideration, and is capable of being addressed. The question is whether, in accordance with the applicant’s contract of employment, the respondent’s termination and subsequent payment to the applicant included payment in lieu of notice. 4 The Commission will invite further submissions in writing from the parties confined to the following question. The parties are asked to address: (a) Whether payment in lieu of notice ought apply; (b) If the answer to (a) is ‘yes’ what amount of payment in lieu of notice applies; (c) Was proper notice to terminate the employment contract given by the respondent to the applicant; and (d) What period, in terms of assessing an amount of pay in lieu of notice, would have been reasonable in the circumstances. 5 A further decision will issue, following receipt of the submissions referred to herein. Please submit your views in writing by close of business Monday, 28 June 2010 to the Commission. The Commission requests the respondent to provide a copy of their submission to the applicant and similarly the applicant to the respondent. 6 The present proceedings stand adjourned. 1562 WESTERN AUSTRALIAN INDUSTRIAL GAZETTE 90 W.A.I.G. 2010 WAIRC 00782