TERMINATION OF EMPLOYMENT – misconduct – ss.394, 400, 604 Fair Work Act 2009 – appeal – Full Bench – at first instance, Commission not satisfied that dismissal harsh, unjust or unreasonable – during employment, respondent issued appellant with three warnings concerning drug use in the workplace – appellant engaged in drug rehabilitation program and was informed that repeat offences would result in dismissal – appellant was dismissed as a result of a car accident – after investigation, respondent concluded that appellant had consumed synthetic cannabis prior to or during journey home from work – appellant raised nine grounds of appeal – at the core of the dispute was whether an alleged admission made to police should have been regarded in evidence – at the time of the accident, appellant allegedly admitted to police that he had used ‘synthetic cannabis’ – appellant relied on Pfitzner principle and submitted that Watson VP erred by not taking such common law principle into consideration – appellant argued that at the time he allegedly made the admission he was incapable of exercising a sensible judgement about whether or not he should make a statement to the police – Pfitzner principle reflected in Evidence Act 1995 (Cth) and applies in criminal law proceedings – appellant argued should apply in unfair dismissal as it is a principle that guides a ‘fact finding exercise’ – Full Bench rejected such contention – Full Bench of the view that Pfitzner ‘founded on protection of rights of accused persons in criminal law proceedings’ – no application in unfair dismissal proceedings – appeal dismissed. Appeal by Wright against decision of Watson VP of 11 May 2016 [[2016] FWC 1941] Re: AGL Loy Yang P/L
…
