Reasonableness is not a separate requirement, but is the standard or test by which the common law determines whether an order is lawful.

A breach of duty or responsibility is essential to establish negligent performance of functions under s161(d) of the HS Act. The words 'negligent' and 'careless' bear their ordinary and natural meaning, comprehending conduct which a reasonable person would not do, judged against an objectively reasonable standard.

An employee's functions for the purposes of s161(d) of the HS Act include powers, duties and responsibilities carried out in the course of providing service within the scope of their contract of service, regardless of whether expressly set out in a written JDF or contract of employment.

As an authorised signatory of Special Purpose Accounts, approving the payment of employee salaries and overtime is part of an employee's functions, including determining whether employees are entitled to receive payment for the period specified.

Lack of training or formal instruction about how to perform a managerial duty does not excuse negligent or careless performance of that duty, particularly where the employee holds a senior position and the substance of the duty is straightforward (e.g., reviewing overtime forms).

An employee's obligation of obedience at common law is to lawful commands which involve no illegality, fall within the scope of the contract of service, and are reasonable. Reasonableness is not a separate requirement but is the standard by which the common law determines whether an order is lawful.

The authority of an employing authority under the Public Sector Management Act to issue lawful orders should be understood as having the same content as the common law rule, authorising orders which involve no illegality, fall within the scope of the contract of service, and are reasonable.

Where an employer's Managing Director confirms in writing to an employee that a direction from the employee's manager is reasonable and must be followed, this removes any doubt as to the authority of the manager to give that direction.

Where an Inquirer makes a finding that an employee accessed confidential records without valid business reason based on an inference that is not reasonably open on all the evidence, including evidence of workplace practice and the broader context, the finding must be set aside.

Negligent performance of functions requires a breach of duty or responsibility. Negligence is the omitting to do something that a reasonable person would do, or doing something a reasonable person would not do.

By s80 of the PSM Act, an employee who disobeys or disregards a lawful order commits a breach of discipline and is liable to disciplinary action. Section 80A provides that 'disciplinary action' includes a reprimand, fine, transfer, reduction in remuneration or classification and dismissal.

An employee's obligation of obedience is to lawful commands which involve no illegality, fall within the scope of the contract of service, and are reasonable. Reasonableness is not a separate requirement but is the standard or test by which the common law determines whether an order is lawful, determined by reference to the nature of the employment, established usages, common practices and general provisions of instruments governing the relationship.