No double dipping over dismissals
The statutory rule in the Fair Work Act which prohibits multiple actions being taken “in relation to a dismissal” (see s 725, Fair Work Act 2009) also extends to actions for “accessorial liability” against parties who were not the employee’s employer. This rather odd result is undoubtedly correct in the light of the careful reasoned judgement in Hazledine v Wakerley and another (2016) FWC 4989 delivered 26 July 2016 per Kovacic DP.
“For all the above reasons, I have concluded that Ms Hazeldine’s general protections application was both made after her AHRC complaint had been made and in relation to her dismissal. As such, s 725 of the Act operated as a bar to Ms Hazeldine’s general protections application being made because her AHRC complaint is a complaint made by her under another law in relation to her dismissal and it had not been withdrawn nor failed for want of jurisdiction within the meaning of s 732. Ms Hazeldine’s general protections application is therefore dismissed because it was prohibited by s 725 of the Act. An order dismissing Ms Hazeldine’s application will issued in conjunction with this decision.”