Application for an unfair dismissal remedy – jurisdictional objection –out of time – Application not out of time – Application filed prematurely – Power exercised under section 586(b) to waive an irregularity.

At the conclusion of a hearing today I determined for reasons given in transcript that application U2025/4904 was not filed out of time and was in fact filed prematurely. I also determined to exercise power under section 586(b) of the Fair Work Act 2009 to waive an irregularity in that the application U2025/4904 was filed two days before the date of termination.

Based on the determinations above the application is within jurisdiction and will be listed for further directions.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

Details

AGLC: Angus Broadfoot v Radtek Pty. Ltd [2025] FWC 1537
Case: [2025] FWC 1537
Decision Date: 4 JUNE 2025

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Angus Broadfoot versus Radtek Pty Ltd was heard by the Fair Work Commission, with Commissioner Simpson presiding over the matter in Brisbane on 4 June 2025. The dispute centred on a claim of unfair dismissal by Angus Broadfoot against his former employer, Radtek Pty Ltd. Broadfoot argued that his dismissal was unjust, and he sought a remedy under the Fair Work Act 2009.

The primary legal issue before the Commission was whether Broadfoot's application was filed out of time. The Commission had to determine if the application, which was lodged two days prior to the official date of termination, was indeed premature and thus, not within the jurisdictional boundaries of the Commission. Additionally, the Commission needed to decide whether it had the authority to waive the irregularity under section 586(b) of the Fair Work Act.

Commissioner Simpson concluded that Broadfoot's application was not out of time but was, in fact, filed prematurely. The Commissioner exercised the power under section 586(b) to waive the irregularity, thereby rendering the application timely and within the Commission's jurisdiction. This decision allowed the case to proceed with further directions, ensuring that Broadfoot's claim for unfair dismissal could be fully examined.

Orders