Akeem Owoola v Springmount Property Services Pty Ltd

[2023] FWC 2398

[2023] FWC 2398

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009

s.394—Unfair dismissal

Akeem Owoola
v

Springmount Property Services Pty Ltd

(U2023/6490)

VICE PRESIDENT CATANZARITI SYDNEY, 18 SEPTEMBER 2023

Application for an unfair dismissal remedy.

1. Akeem Owoola (the applicant) was employed by Springmount Property Services Pty Ltd (the respondent) from the 16^th of August 2021 through to the 22^nd of February 2022.

1. On the 17^th of July 2023, the applicant made an application for a remedy for unfair dismissal under s.394 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act).
   
   

2. The application was lodged 124 days out of time.
   
   

3. On the 31^st of August 2023, correspondence was sent to the applicant in relation to the matter being lodged out of time and he was required to respond by the 5^th of September 2023. No response was received at this time.
   
   

4. On the 7^th of September 2023, further correspondence was sent to the applicant directing him to provide a response by 5:00pm on the 12^th of September 2023. He was advised in this correspondence that in the absence of a reply, his application may be dismissed.
   
   

5. The applicant has not responded to any of the correspondence that my Chambers has sent to this date.

1. Section 587 of the Act provides:

587 Dismissing applications

(1) Without limiting when the FWC may dismiss an application, the FWC may dismiss an application if:

(a) the application is not made in accordance with this Act; or

(b) the application is frivolous or vexatious; or

(c) the application has no reasonable prospects of success.

(2) Despite paragraphs (1)(b) and (c), FWC must not dismiss an application under section 365 or 773 on the ground that the application:

(a) is frivolous or vexatious; or

(b) has no reasonable prospects of success.

(3) FWC may dismiss an application:

(a) on its own initiative; or

(b) on application.

1. The words, “Without limiting when FWC may dismiss an application” at the commencement of s.587(1) of the Act, establish that the jurisdiction of the Commission to dismiss an application is not limited to the circumstances set out in s.587(1)(a), (b) and (c).

1. In the circumstances I have decided to dismiss the application for want of prosecution pursuant to s.587(3)(a) of the Act.

1. An order to that effect will issue with this decision.

VICE PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<PR766314>