CASE PROCEDURES – appeals – ss.394, 400, 604 Fair Work Act 2009 – permission to appeal – Full Bench – appeal against decision to dismiss unfair dismissal application where appellant not protected from unfair dismissal as minimum employment period not met – six grounds of appeal summarised by appellant – no apparent error in findings relating to minimum employment period – no arguable case of error in assumption that relevant provisions of FW Act are constitutionally valid – Full Bench could not see how rule in Jones v Dunkel would have had meaningful application in case where respondent did call evidence relating to relevant issues – even where adverse inference can be drawn, it remains at discretion of decision maker whether one should be drawn – no arguable case of error of kind described in House v The King on this issue – no appealable error in grant of permission for respondent to have legal representation – no basis for contention that finding as to credibility of witness was inconsistent with incontrovertibly established facts – no indication that reflection on possibility application might have been made out of time had any bearing on assessment of whether appellant had met minimum employment period – no apparent error in conclusion as to continuity of employment – Full Bench not persuaded of arguable case of error in first instance decision – no matters of importance or general application identified that would enliven public interest for permission to appeal to be granted – no manifest injustice – not in public interest to grant permission to appeal – permission to appeal refused. Appeal by Calleri against decision of Wilson C of 24 May 2017 [[2017] FWC 2702] Re: Swinburne University of Technology
…
