Application by Dhana Bhandari Summary

[2025] FWC 842

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION AND ORDER

Fair Work Act 2009

s.372—General protections

Application by Dhana Bhandari

(C2025/633)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT EASTON

SYDNEY, 27 MARCH 2025

Application to deal with contraventions not involving dismissal –application fee not paid or waived – application not made in accordance with the Act – application dismissed.

On 27 January 2025 Ms Dhana Bhandari made a general protections application under s.372 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth).

The application filed by Ms Dhana Bhandari was incomplete as she had not completed the Respondent details, and questions 2.1, 3.1, and 3.3.

Section 587(1)(a) allows the Commission to dismiss Ms Bhandari’s application without conducting a hearing, so long as the applicant has been afforded procedural fairness.

Ms Bhandari has had ample opportunity to rectify the deficiency in the application and also ample opportunity to show why her application should not be dismissed under s.587 (see generally Bond v Carbridge Pty Ltd T/A Carbridge [2024] FWC 1302 at [15]-[16] and the cases cited therein).

I have decided to dismiss Ms Bhandari’s general protections claim using the power available under s.587(1)(a) and make the following order:

The application under s.372 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) made by Ms Dhana Bhandari on 27 January 2025 is dismissed.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT
Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the case of an application made by Dhana Bhandari under section 372 of the Fair Work Act 2009, the Fair Work Commission was tasked with addressing Ms Bhandari's general protections application, which pertained to alleged contraventions not involving dismissal. The application was incomplete as it failed to include necessary respondent details and responses to specific questions outlined in the application form. This case reached the Deputy President of the Fair Work Commission, Easton, who was responsible for determining the appropriate course of action under the circumstances.

The central legal issue the Deputy President had to resolve was whether Ms Bhandari's application could be dismissed without a hearing, given its incomplete nature. This decision hinged on the provisions of section 587(1)(a) of the Act, which allows for the dismissal of an application without a hearing if it is incomplete and procedural fairness has been afforded to the applicant. The Deputy President considered whether Ms Bhandari had been given sufficient opportunity to rectify the deficiencies in her application and to justify why it should not be dismissed.

In evaluating the case, the Deputy President concluded that Ms Bhandari had been given adequate opportunity to correct the omissions in her application and to argue against dismissal. The decision referenced previous cases, such as Bond v Carbridge Pty Ltd T/A Carbridge, to support the rationale that the application could be dismissed without a hearing. Consequently, the Deputy President exercised the power under section 587(1)(a) to dismiss Ms Bhandari’s application.

The Deputy President issued an order dismissing Ms Bhandari's general protections application under section 372 of the Fair Work Act 2009, made on 27 January 2025. This dismissal was based on the application's incompleteness and the procedural fairness afforded to Ms Bhandari.

Application by Dhana Bhandari

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established