Anne Young v Southern Pathology Services Pty Ltd

[2019] FWC 6731

[2019] FWC 6731

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.372—General protections

Anne Young
v
Southern Pathology Services Pty Ltd
(C2019/3893)

VICE PRESIDENT CATANZARITI SYDNEY, 2 OCTOBER 2019

Application to deal with other contraventions dispute.

[1] On 24 June 2019, Mrs Anne Young (the Applicant) made an application to the Fair Work Commission (the Commission) to deal with a general protections contraventions dispute under s 372 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) (the Act).

[2] On 25 June 2019, the Commission unsuccessfully attempted to contact the Applicant regarding the payment of the filing fee. A voicemail message was left. Also on 25 June 2019, the Applicant was advised in a letter from the Commission that her application required payment of the filing fee or a completed waiver form if she wished to proceed with her application.

[3] On 17 and 23 July 2019, the Commission unsuccessfully attempted to contact the Applicant. Voicemail messages were left on each occasion.

[4] Since that time no further response from the Applicant has been received by the Commission.

[5] The Applicant did not pay the required application fee.

[6] Section 373, which deals with application fees, provides:

“373 Application fees

(1) The application must be accompanied by any fee prescribed by the regulations.

(2) The regulations may prescribe:

(a) a fee for making an application to the FWC under section 372; and

(b) a method for indexing the fee; and

(c) the circumstances in which all or part of the fee may be waived or refunded.”

[7] Regulation 3.08 of the Fair Work Regulations 2009 prescribes an application fee for the purposes of s.373(2).

[8] Section 587(1) of the Act provides:

“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 prospects of success.”

[9] Having regard to the circumstances of this matter, I am satisfied that as the application was not accompanied by the fee as required by s.373 of the Act, the application was not made in accordance with the Act. As such, the application is dismissed pursuant to s.587(1)(a) of the Act. An Order to this effect will be issued separately.

VICE PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<PR712857>