The appellant was employed as a teacher with the respondent. She commenced employment with the respondent in January 2023, subject to a 12-month probationary period. Her employment was terminated in May 2023 due to allegations of inappropriate conduct towards students, including an incident where she allegedly pushed and kicked a chair at a student.

The appellant filed an unfair dismissal application with the Commission seeking reinstatement.

The respondent applied for summary dismissal of the unfair dismissal claim, because of an allegation that the appellant had engaged in improper communication with a former student and potential witness.

Commissioner Tsang granted summary dismissal, finding that the appellant's text messages to a witness were intimidatory and had the potential to interfere with the administration of justice.

The appellant appealed the Commissioner's decision to the Full Bench of the Commission. The Full Bench found that the appellant knew she was communicating with a potential witness, by sending text messages that were intended to influence, threaten, and intimidate, which constituted an attempt to interfere with the administration of justice. In these circumstances, the Full Bench affirmed the Commission’s discretionary power to summarily dismiss a claim for a party’s abuse of the Commission’s process.

The appellant then appealed to the Industrial Appeal Court, arguing that the Full Bench's decision was in excess of jurisdiction, erroneous in law, and a denial of her right to be heard. The Industrial Appeal Court dismissed the appeal, finding no merit in the appellant's grounds, and that the appellant’s right to be heard was not denied by the Full Bench. The Industrial Appeal Court concluded that the Full Bench's decision was correct and that the appellant's actions justified the dismissal of her unfair dismissal application.

The decision can be read here.