Luke Kristian Dymock -V- landgate

2018 WAIRC 00172

APPEAL AGAINST THE DECISION TO TERMINATE EMPLOYMENT ON 3 OCTOBER 2017

WESTERN AUSTRALIAN INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS COMMISSION
CITATION : 2018 WAIRC 00172

CORAM

: PUBLIC SERVICE APPEAL BOARD Commissioner D J Matthews- CHAIRMAN MR G RICHARDS - BOARD MEMBER MR N WITKOWSKI - BOARD MEMBER

HEARD

:

Wednesday, 21 February 2018

DELIVERED : monday, 12 march 2018
FILE NO. : PSAB 21 OF 2017

BETWEEN

:

Luke Kristian Dymock

Appellant
AND
Landgate

Respondent

CatchWords : Application to stay appeal - Legislation and principles considered - Appeal stayed

Legislation : Industrial Relations Act 1979

Result : Appeal stayed

Representation:

Counsel:

Appellant : In person

Respondent : Mr J Carroll of counsel

Solicitors:

Respondent : State Solicitors Office

Reasons for Decision

1On 27 October 2017 the appellant lodged a Notice of Appeal to the Public Service Appeal Board in which he contests the respondent’s decision to terminate his employment on 2 October 2017 and seeks reinstatement.

2It now transpires that the appellant has been charged by the Western Australian Police Service with a criminal offence (or offences) arising out of the matter in relation to which the respondent terminated the appellant’s employment.

3The appellant now seeks a stay of these proceedings until such time as the criminal charge (or charges) relating to the matter have been resolved at first instance.

4That is, the appellant seeks a stay of these proceedings until the criminal charge (or charges) have been determined following a trial or plea.

5While the Board notes that it has a legislative duty upon it to resolve matters expeditiously, and understands that the respondent’s preference is that the matter be heard expeditiously, the Board takes the view that an accused person’s right to silence in a criminal jurisdiction is an important one and where the person seeking a remedy from the Board wishes to delay the seeking of that remedy to preserve the right that is to be given great weight.

6The respondent did not point to any particular prejudice to it that would, or might, result from the present proceedings being stayed and, commendably and sensibly, its opposition to the stay was not strong.

7The present appeal will be stayed pending further communication from the parties in relation to the resolution of the criminal matter (or matters).