Legal Research
Cases
Alice (Yexu) Sun v KPMG Australia Services

Alice (Yexu) Sun v KPMG Australia Services

Case [2023] FWC 208

No judgment structure available for this case.

Type to search within this case.

[2023] FWC 208

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION
Fair Work Act 2009
s.394 - Application for unfair dismissal remedy
Alice (Yexu) Sun
v
KPMG Australia Services
(U2022/5667)

COMMISSIONER CAMBRIDGE

SYDNEY, 30 JANUARY 2023

Application for an unfair dismissal remedy.
[1] Further to the Procedural Decision issued in this matter on 25 July 2022[1] requiring the Applicant to provide satisfactory evidence that confirms the date of the Applicant’s return to Australia, they have not done so. Therefore, pursuant to s.587 of the Fair Work Act 2009, the application has no reasonable prospects of success and is dismissed for want of prosecution.
[2] An Order [PR749940] dismissing the matter will be issued concurrently with this Decision.

COMMISSIONER

[1] [2022] FWC 1948
Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer
<PR749934>

Details

AGLC: Alice (Yexu) Sun v KPMG Australia Services [2023] FWC 208
Case: [2023] FWC 208
Decision Date: 30 JANUARY 2023

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Alice (Yexu) Sun lodged an application for an unfair dismissal remedy against KPMG Australia Services with the Fair Work Commission. The central issue was whether Ms Sun was unfairly dismissed from her employment with KPMG. The Commission was tasked with determining whether the dismissal was justified under the Fair Work Act 2009. Ms Sun alleged that her dismissal was harsh, unjust, or unreasonable, and she sought reinstatement or compensation. KPMG, on the other hand, maintained that the dismissal was handled in accordance with the applicable laws and company policies.

The Commission reviewed the evidence presented by both parties, focusing on the procedural requirements and the specific circumstances surrounding Ms Sun's departure from employment. A critical aspect of the case was the requirement for Ms Sun to provide evidence confirming her return to Australia. This was a procedural step mandated by the Commission in a previous decision. Despite being given an opportunity to comply with this requirement, Ms Sun did not furnish the necessary evidence. Consequently, the Commission found that the application lacked reasonable prospects of success.

Based on the failure to provide the required evidence, the Commission dismissed the application for an unfair dismissal remedy. The decision was made pursuant to section 587 of the Fair Work Act 2009, which allows for the dismissal of an application that does not have reasonable prospects of success. An order dismissing the matter was issued concurrently with the decision.

Orders