Anthony Tristan Jansen v Hanson Heidelberg Cement Group

[2024] FWC 3381

[2024] FWC 3381

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009

s.394—Unfair dismissal

Anthony Tristan Jansen
v

Hanson Heidelberg Cement Group

(U2024/11385)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT CLANCY MELBOURNE, 4 DECEMBER 2024

Application for an unfair dismissal remedy – dismissal under s.587 at the Commission’s initiative.

1. Mr Anthony Tristan Jansen lodged an unfair dismissal application under s.394 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) (the Act) for an unfair dismissal remedy on 23 September 2024.

1. The application was incomplete in that Mr Jansen did not pay the required application fee or lodge a completed Form F80 – Application for waiver of the application fee (Form F80).

1. On 27 September 2024, the Commission emailed correspondence to Mr Jansen’s nominated email address informing him that payment of the application fee or a completed Form F80 was required for the Commission to progress his unfair dismissal application. That correspondence warned Mr Jansen that if payment was not made or a Form F80 was not received within 7 calendar days, his unfair dismissal application may be dismissed.

1. Later that same day, the Commission sent an SMS request to Mr Jansen’s nominated telephone number requesting him to pay the application fee in relation to his unfair dismissal application.

1. On 16 October 2024, the Commission emailed correspondence to Mr Jansen’s nominated email address, reminding him that his application required payment of the application fee or a completed Form F80. That correspondence also warned that if payment was not made or a Form F80 was not received, his application may be dismissed.

1. A final attempt to contact Mr Jansen was made by the Commission by telephone on 11 November 2024 to follow up on the outstanding application fee. Mr Jansen could not be reached, and a voicemail message was left requesting Mr Jansen to make the required payment and warning him that his matter was at risk of being dismissed if payment was not received by close of business on 11 November 2024.

1. To date, there has been no response from Mr Jansen, the required fee has not been paid and a completed Form F80 has not been received.

1. Section 395 of the Act, which deals with application fees, provides as follows:

“395  Application fees

(1) An application to the FWC under this Division 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 this Division; 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.” (bold text in the original)

1. In relation to an application made pursuant to s.394 of the Act, s.395(1) relevantly provides that the application “must be accompanied by any fee prescribed by the regulations.” Regulation 3.07 of the Fair Work Regulations 2009 (Cth) sets out the amount of the fee for making an unfair dismissal application.

1. Section 587 of the Act relevantly 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 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.

…

(3) The FWC may dismiss an application:

(a) on its own initiative; or

(b) on application.” (bold text in the original)

1. The material before the Commission indicates that the relevant application form was not accompanied by the prescribed fee and that Mr Jansen has not lodged a completed Form F80. I am satisfied that 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 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 Mr Jansen, there has been no response. In these circumstances, I am satisfied that it is appropriate in all the circumstances to dismiss the purported application. An order[1] to this effect will be issued with this decision.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

[1] PR782046.

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<PR782044>