| Summary |
INTERIM INJUNCTION – Application for interim reinstatement – Applicant claimed unjustified demotion, suspension, and dismissal – Respondent claimed actions justified for applicant’s serious misconduct – Respondent commenced investigation following concerns applicant’s performance poor and disharmony with staff and students – Respondent's Chief Executive Officer (“CEO”) alleged applicant deleted student feedback criticising applicant’s performance, failed to advise managers of criticisms and failed to return materials when instructed – CEO raised allegations to applicant at meeting and requested to review applicant’s curriculum material – Applicant instructed to work on curriculum and not interact with staff and students – Applicant suspended following failure to follow instructions – Respondent sent letter asking applicant to answer allegations – Respondent claimed applicant’s answers inadequate – Applicant dismissed – Applicant claimed arguable case on three heads – First, whether meetings disciplinary and correct procedures followed – Second, whether applicant demoted – Third, whether suspension based on new allegations – Authority found arguable case – Applicant claimed financial difficulties, visa work restrictions, and damage to reputation put balance of convenience in their favour – Respondent claimed reinstatement inconvenient when trust and confidence lost, applicant failed to acknowledge responsibility for misconducts, not in interests of third parties and damages adequate remedy – Authority found balance favoured respondent – Found applicant’s claim of reputation loss and financial difficulty unsupported – Found applicant’s visa restrictions do not prevent applicant obtaining new employment – Found interim reinstatement would disrupt relations between applicant and staff and students – Found respondent may face greater liability if allegations proved therefore ought to have opportunity to minimise damage caused – Found damages adequate for applicant and substantive investigation would restore reputation loss – Found relative strength of cases indeterminate - Found balance of convenience tipped overall justice in respondent’s favour – Interim reinstatement declined – Course Leader/Teacher |