Amy Edwards v Compass Group (Australia) Pty Ltd
[2024] FWC 714
•20 MARCH 2024
| [2024] FWC 714 |
| FAIR WORK COMMISSION |
| DECISION |
Fair Work Act 2009
s.394—Unfair dismissal
Amy Edwards
v
Compass Group (Australia) Pty Ltd
(U2024/871)
| DEPUTY PRESIDENT CLANCY | MELBOURNE, 20 MARCH 2024 |
Application for relief from unfair dismissal – incomplete application – dismissal under s.587 at the Commission’s initiative.
On 26 January 2024, Ms Amy Edwards made an application to the Fair Work Commission for a remedy for unfair dismissal pursuant to s.394 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act).
The application was incomplete in that Ms Edwards did not pay the required application fee, nor lodge a complete Form F80 – Application for waiver of the application fee (Form F80). Neither did Ms Edwards provide the date the dismissal took effect.
On 29 January 2024, the Commission attempted to contact Ms Edwards on her nominated telephone number. Ms Edwards did not answer the call and there was no voicemail facility. Later that day, the Commission emailed correspondence to Ms Edwards’ nominated email address requesting that she provide further details as her application was incomplete. That correspondence also advised that if a completed Form F80 or payment of the application fee was not provided within 14 days, her application may be dismissed.
On 9 and 16 February 2024, the Commission attempted to contact Ms Edwards on her nominated telephone number, Ms Edwards did not answer the calls and, on the former date, a voicemail message was left requesting that Ms Edwards contact the Commission.
On 11 March 2023, the Commission made a final attempt to contact Ms Edwards on her nominated telephone number, Ms Edwards did not answer the call and a voicemail message was left requesting that she contact the Commission. To date there has been no response from Ms Edwards, the required fee has not been paid and nor has a completed From F80 been received.
In relation to an application made pursuant to s.394 of the FW Act, s.395(1) provides that the application “must be accompanied by any fee prescribed by the regulations.” At the time the application was made, the regulations prescribed a fee of $83.30. The regulations also allow for an application to be made for the fee to be waived.
Section 587(1) of the FW Act provides as follows:
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 prospect of success.
In considering all the circumstances, I am satisfied that the relevant application form was not accompanied by the prescribed fee and the application has not been made in accordance with the Act. Given the absence of the fee payment, it is likely that there is no valid application before the Commission[1] and no further action is required. A non-compliant application is directly contemplated by s.587(1)(a) of the Act. Despite the attempts by the Commission to contact her and the reminders, Ms Edwards has not responded. In these circumstances, I am satisfied that it is appropriate in all the circumstances to dismiss the purported application. An Order[2] to this effect will be issued with this decision.
DEPUTY PRESIDENT
[1] Atanaskovic Hartnell Corporate Services Pty Limited t/a Atanaskovic Hartnell v Elizabeth Maree Kelly[2017] FWCFB 763 at [29].
[2] PR772534.
Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer
<PR772532>
0
0
0