Australia, Aug. 13 -- New South Wales Land and Environment Court issued text of the following judgement on July 14:

1. The substantive proceedings in this matter concerns an application under Part 6 of Chapter 2 of the Industrial Relations Act 1996 (the Industrial Relations Act) by Ms Mary Ters (the Applicant), a former registered nurse employed at the Grace Centre for Newborn Intensive Care at the Children's Hospital, Westmead, alleging that her dismissal was harsh, unjust and unreasonable. The Respondent, the Health Secretary, is the nominal employer of persons employed at a public hospital in New South Wales.

2. The Applicant was dismissed effective 6 December 2024. On 20 December 2024, the Applicant filed these proceedings. Another member of the Commission, Commissioner O'Sullivan, was originally allocated the matter. The Commissioner attempted to resolve the proceedings by Conciliation (described below). I infer the Commissioner ultimately formed the view that all reasonable attempts had been made to resolve the matter by Conciliation and had proved unsuccessful [1] . In the result, at a Mention on 27 May 2025 the Commissioner programmed the matter for hearing commencing in early August 2025.

3. Pursuant to the timetable set by Commissioner O'Sullivan, the Applicant's evidence was to be filed and served by 17 June 2025. The Applicant complied with that timetable.

4. On 17 June 2025, pursuant to the right given by s 173 of the Industrial Relations Act, the Respondent requested the matter be reallocated to another member for Arbitration. The matter was subsequently allocated to me.

5. On 1 July 2025, the Respondent filed a Notice of Motion, supported by an affidavit of Ms Holly Irwin (solicitor with day to day carriage of the matter on behalf of the Respondent), seeking Orders pursuant to s 73 of the Civil Procedure Act 2005 and/or Rules 12.11 and 13.4 of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 dismissing these proceedings (or alternatively issuing a permanent stay of the proceedings), and related orders vacating the existing procedural directions, on the basis that a binding compromise or settlement of the proceeding had been reached, finally disposing of the issues in dispute.

6. The Motion was listed for Directions on Monday, 7 July 2025, at which time a timetable was put in place to enable the Motion to be dealt with expeditiously, noting the substantive hearing of the matter was currently listed for a 4-day hearing commencing 5 August 2025.

7. Ms Ters is self-represented. For that reason and to put the Commission in the best position to determine the Motion expeditiously, I made Directions for the filing and service of a short outline of written submissions (capped at 5 pages) to be filed by the Respondent (the applicant on the motion) in support of the Motion.

8. The procedural directions for readying the matter for substantive hearing (relating to evidence and submissions of the Respondent and in reply by the Applicant) were vacated, but the substantive hearing dates were retained to facilitate the just, quick and cheap resolution of the proceedings in the event the Motion was unsuccessful.

*Rest of the document can be viewed at: (https://www.caselaw.nsw.gov.au/decision/19807a6844ab320288b21dce)

Disclaimer: Curated by HT Syndication.