Amy-Lee Guest v Waddell Family Investments Pty Ltd trading as Pacific Gardens Van Village

[2014] FWC 4607

[2014] FWC 4607

The attached document replaces the document previously issued with the above code on 9 July 2014.

This document has been altered to correct a paragraph numbering error.

Dale Ramsey

Associate to Commissioner Stanton

Dated 11 July 2014

[2014] FWC 4607

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.365—General protections

Amy-Lee Guest
v
Waddell Family Investments Pty Ltd trading as Pacific Gardens Van Village
(C2014/4661)

COMMISSIONER STANTON NEWCASTLE, 9 JULY 2014

Application to deal with contraventions involving dismissal.

[1] This matter was listed for Conference before the Commission on 27 June 2014. The applicant stated in her Form F8 – General Protections Application that she was dismissed by Waddell Family Investments Pty Ltd trading as Pacific Gardens Van Village (the respondent) on 8 May 2014. The respondent contended that the applicant was dismissed due to poor performance.

[2] The applicant failed to attend the Conference on 27 June 2014. The respondent however did attend and was inconvenienced by the applicant’s non-appearance. The Commission subsequently sought to contact the applicant by telephone on two separate occasions without success.

[3] On 27 June 2014, my Chambers wrote to the applicant stating that she had until 12:00noon on Friday, 4 July 2014 to provide reasons for her non-attendance at the Conference and to provide reasons why her application should not be dismissed pursuant to s.587 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act).

[4] Section 587 of the Act relevantly provides:

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.

Note: For another power of the FWC to dismiss an application for a remedy for unfair dismissal made under Division 5 of Part 3-2, see section 399A.

(2) Despite paragraphs (1)(b) and (c), the 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) The FWC may dismiss an application:

(a) on its own initiative; or

(b) on application.

[5] The applicant has failed to respond to the correspondence sent to her on 27 June 2014. Accordingly, I have decided to dismiss the application pursuant to s.587 of the Act.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<Price code A, PR552951>