Acting reasonably does not require a single course of action; different employers may approach the matter differently and form different conclusions, but still be acting reasonably, assessed against the circumstances including the experience and resources of the small business employer.

Under the Small Business Fair Dismissal Code Summary Dismissal section, it is not necessary to determine whether the employer was correct in believing serious misconduct occurred, only whether the employer genuinely held the belief and whether it was based on reasonable grounds after reasonable investigation.

For summary dismissal under the Small Business Fair Dismissal Code, there are two steps: first, consideration of whether the employer held a belief that the employee's conduct was sufficiently serious to justify immediate dismissal; and secondly, consideration of whether that belief was based on reasonable grounds, incorporating the concept that the employer carried out a reasonable investigation. The belief may be on reasonable grounds if the person making the decision had personally witnessed the conduct.

There are two steps in determining whether the Small Business Fair Dismissal Code 'Summary Dismissal' section is satisfied: first, whether the employer held a belief that the employee's conduct was sufficiently serious to justify immediate dismissal; second, whether that belief was based on reasonable grounds, incorporating the concept of a reasonable investigation. It is not necessary to determine whether the employer was correct in the belief it held.

The Commission does not need to be satisfied that the conduct actually occurred or that a valid reason existed; the issue is the employer's reasonable belief in the seriousness of the conduct.

A two-step process applies to Code compliance for summary dismissal: first, whether the employer held a belief that conduct was sufficiently serious to justify immediate dismissal; second, whether that belief was based on reasonable grounds.

There are two steps in determining whether a summary dismissal complies with the Code: first, whether the employer held a belief that the employee's conduct was sufficiently serious to justify immediate dismissal, and second, whether that belief was based on reasonable grounds incorporating a reasonable investigation. It is not necessary to determine whether the employer was correct in that belief; acting reasonably does not require a single course of action and different employers may approach the matter differently while still acting reasonably.

The Code operates by reference to whether grounds for dismissal fall within serious misconduct as defined in reg.1.07, and the Summary Dismissal section applies when a small business dismisses without notice on such grounds.

There are two steps in determining whether the Small Business Fair Dismissal Code summary dismissal provisions are satisfied: (1) whether the employer held a belief that the employee's conduct was sufficiently serious to justify immediate dismissal; and (2) whether that belief was based on reasonable grounds. The second element incorporates the concept that the employer carried out a reasonable investigation. It is not necessary to determine whether the employer was correct in the belief it held.

Acting reasonably in a small business dismissal does not require a single course of action. Different employers may approach the matter differently and form different conclusions, perhaps giving more benefit of any doubt, but still be acting reasonably. The legislation requires consideration of whether the particular employer carried out a reasonable investigation and reached a reasonable conclusion in all the circumstances, including the experience and resources of the small business employer concerned.

For small business dismissals, the employer must establish: (1) that the employer held a belief that the employee's conduct was sufficiently serious to justify immediate dismissal; and (2) that this belief was based on reasonable grounds, including carrying out a reasonable investigation. It is not necessary to determine whether the employer was correct in its belief.

Section 23(2)(b) requires only that a casual employee has been employed on a 'regular and systematic basis' at the relevant time; it does not incorporate the requirement of 'reasonable expectation of continuing employment' which appears only in s.384(2).