Amber Saggers-Nepe v BHP, Newman VFRS

[2025] FWC 628

[2025] FWC 628

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION and ORDER

Fair Work Act 2009

s.394—Unfair dismissal

Amber Saggers-Nepe
v

BHP, Newman VFRS

(U2024/14067)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT EASTON SYDNEY, 28 FEBRUARY 2025

Application for an unfair dismissal remedy – dismissal under s.587(1)(c) at the Commission’s initiative for want of prosecution.

1. On 25 November 2024, Miss Amber Saggers-Nepe made an unfair dismissal application to the Fair Work Commission under s.394 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth).

1. Miss Saggers-Nepe did not attend a scheduled telephone conciliation conference on 16 December 2024. Nor did she attend the second telephone conciliation conference that was scheduled for 16 January 2025.

1. Commission staff tried to contact Miss Saggers-Nepe on 16 January and 6 February 2025 by telephone, email and SMS about this concern. Ms Saggers-Nepe has not responded to the Commission’s correspondence since 12 December 2024.

1. Section 587 allows the Commission to dismiss an application on the Commission’s own initiative in the early stages of the proceedings for want of prosecution. If an applicant’s conduct or omissions show that they are no longer willing to participate in their own case the Commission is not required to persevere with the application (see Viavattene v Health Care Australia [2013] FWCFB 2532 at [39]).

1. I am satisfied that Miss Saggers-Nepe has had the opportunity to put a case for consideration on all matters material to the decision to dismiss the application under s.587. In the circumstances I am satisfied that the facility under s.587 can and should be engaged to dismiss Miss Saggers-Nepe application. I make the following order:

1. The application under s.394 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) made by Miss Amber Saggers-Nepe on 25 November 2024 is dismissed.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<PR784889>