Andrade v Goodyear and Dunlop Tyres (Aust) Pty Ltd

In this matter before Judge Barnes, the applicant, Mr Andrade, sought to bring a general protections court application against his former employer, Goodyear and Dunlop Tyres (Aust) Pty Ltd, and three of its officers, Messrs Hamilton, Beh, and Cross. The dispute arose from Mr Andrade's dismissal from employment on 13 June 2017. Mr Andrade had previously lodged an application with the Fair Work Commission (FWC) concerning his dismissal, but this application was made on 1 September 2017, which was outside the 21-day time limit stipulated in section 366(1)(a) of the *Fair Work Act 2009* (Cth). The FWC did not grant an extension of time, and consequently, did not deal with the dispute or issue a certificate under section 368(3) of the Act.

The central legal issues before the court were whether Mr Andrade was precluded by section 370 of the *Fair Work Act 2009* (Cth) from making a general protections court application in relation to his dismissal dispute, and if so, whether he could nonetheless pursue claims against the individual officers on the basis of their alleged involvement in contraventions of section 340 of the Act. Specifically, the court had to determine if the prohibition in section 370, which requires a certificate from the FWC under section 368(3) before a court application can be made for a dismissal dispute, applied to claims against the officers for alleged contraventions of section 340, even if those contraventions were linked to the dismissal.

Judge Barnes reasoned that section 370 of the *Fair Work Act 2009* (Cth) imposes a jurisdictional bar on bringing a general protections court application in relation to a dismissal dispute unless the FWC has issued a certificate under section 368(3)(a). Mr Andrade conceded that this section prevented him from seeking orders against Goodyear in relation to his dismissal. The court considered whether this prohibition extended to claims against the individual officers for alleged involvement in contraventions of section 340 of the Act, which were said to consist of his dismissal and investigation by Goodyear. The judge concluded that if the prohibition in section 370 applied, the court would lack jurisdiction to hear such claims against the officers.