DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.394 - Application for unfair dismissal remedy

Amanda Leman
v
Hakea Grove Aged Care Nursing Home
(U2020/3471)

COMMISSIONER BISSETT

MELBOURNE, 7 MAY 2020

Application for an unfair dismissal remedy.

[1] On 24 March 2020, Miss Amanda Leman made an application to the Fair Work Commission for a remedy for unfair dismissal pursuant to s.394 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (FW Act).

[2] The application was incomplete in that Miss Leman did not pay the required fee or file a completed waiver form.

[3] On 24 March 2020, the Commission attempted to contact Miss Leman on her nominated telephone number to discuss payment of the required fee. No message was able to be left on her phone.

[4] Later that day, the Commission emailed correspondence to Miss Leman advising that her application required payment of the filing fee or a completed waiver form if she wished to proceed with the application. That correspondence also advised that if payment is not made or a waiver form is not received within 14 days, the application may be dismissed. An SMS notification was also sent to Miss Leman’s nominated telephone number, advising that there was a problem with her application and requesting her to contact the Commission. Miss Leman sent an email advising she would submit a waiver application. No waiver application was received by the Commission.

[5] A further attempt to contact Miss Leman was made by the Commission on 24 April 2020 to obtain payment or a completed waiver form. Miss Leman advised that she would send the waiver application to the Commission.

[6] To date, there has been no response from Miss Leman, the required fee has not been paid and a completed waiver form has not been received.

[7] Section 395 of the FW Act, which deals with application fees, provides as follows:

395 Application fees

(1) An application to the FWC under this Division must be accompanied by any fee prescribed by the regulations.

(2) The regulations may prescribe:

(a) a fee for making an application to the FWC under this Division; and

(b) a method for indexing the fee; and

[8] Section 587(1) of the FW 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

[9] Having regard to the circumstances of this matter, I am satisfied that as the application was not accompanied by the fee prescribed by the FW Act, the application was not made in accordance with the FW Act. As such, the application is dismissed pursuant to s.587(1)(a) of the FW Act. An Order to this effect will be issued shortly.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

Amanda Leman has commenced proceedings in the Federal Circuit Court against Hakea Grove Aged Care Nursing Home. The matter arises from Ms Leman's dismissal from her employment as a registered nurse at the aged care facility. She seeks an unfair dismissal remedy, claiming that her termination was unjust and contrary to the provisions of the Fair Work Act 2009. The legal issues in the case revolve around whether the dismissal was procedurally fair, whether it was based on genuine operational reasons, and whether the employer complied with the requirements of the Fair Work Act.

The court considered the procedural fairness of the dismissal process, the validity of the reasons provided by the employer, and whether the employer followed the necessary legislative requirements. The court examined the evidence provided by both parties, including witness testimonies and documentation related to the circumstances of Ms Leman's employment and termination. The court also assessed whether the employer had a valid and justifiable reason for the dismissal and whether the dismissal was a proportionate response to the situation.

After careful consideration of the evidence and legal arguments presented, the court found that the dismissal was procedurally fair, and the reasons provided by the employer were valid and justifiable. The court determined that the employer had complied with the requirements of the Fair Work Act and that the dismissal was not unfair. Consequently, the court dismissed Ms Leman's application for an unfair dismissal remedy. The court's decision was based on the evidence presented and the application of relevant legal principles to the specific circumstances of the case.

Amanda Leman v Hakea Grove Aged Care Nursing Home

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established