TERMINATION OF EMPLOYMENT – extension of time – permission to appeal – ss.394(3), 400 Fair Work Act 2009 – appellant employer sought permission to appeal decision of Commission at first instance – Commission granted employee extension of time for filing application for unfair dismissal remedy – Commission found employee had attempted to file application within 21 day limit by post – application failed to arrive to Commission – Commission records showed employee made subsequent enquiries and filed application by email – Commission considered matters required to be taken into account under s.394(3) of the Act – determined proper basis to grant extension of time – test under s.400 characterised as stringent one [Coal & Allied Mining Services] – rarely appropriate to grant permission to appeal unless arguable case of appealable error demonstrated – decision whether to extend time for filing an application involves broad exercise of discretion – decision-maker must have acted on wrong principle, mistaken facts, taken into account an irrelevant consideration or failed to take into account relevant consideration or made a decision which is unreasonable or manifestly unjust [House v the King] – Full Bench held satisfied open on evidence before Commission to find combination of factors existed which together amounted to exceptional circumstances – noted in circumstances of case may have been appropriate to hold hearing or conference to determine extension of time application however result not counter-intuitive and did not manifest any injustice – permission to appeal refused. Appeal by Ceres Agricultural Company P/L t/a Ceres Agricultural Company against decision of Drake SDP of 7 December 2015 [[2015] FWC 8451] Re: Regan
…
