Application by Penny Huckel

[2024] FWC 3423

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION AND ORDER

Fair Work Act 2009

s.739—Dispute resolution in relation to flexible working arrangements

Application by Penny Huckel

(C2024/7583)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT EASTON

SYDNEY, 6 DECEMBER 2024

Application to deal with a dispute in relation to flexible working arrangements – application dismissed.

On 19 October 2024 Ms Penny Huckel made an application to deal with a dispute in relation to flexible working arrangements to the Fair Work Commission under s.739 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth).

For the reasons that follow I am satisfied that Ms Huckel’s application has not been made in accordance with the Act and that it is appropriate to dismiss the application.

Ms Huckel’s application was incomplete because she did not complete important questions relating to the legal basis of her claim.

Commission staff contacted Ms Huckel on the following dates:
· 25 October 2024 by telephone and email; and
· 30 October 2024 by telephone and email.

Ms Huckel indicated by telephone that she was confused about the particular questions on the form. Ms Huckel was given information about how she could obtain legal advice about her claim.

On 4 November 2024 an email was sent to Ms Huckel asking her to provide a completed Form F10 be filed by no later than 6 November 2024. Ms Huckel has been on notice of the likely consequences of the application remaining incomplete.

No response has been received from Ms Huckel.

Section 587 of the Act 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.

…

(3) The FWC may dismiss an application:
(a) on its own initiative; or
(b) on application.”

Section 587 confers a discretion on the Commission to dismiss the application. I am satisfied that Ms Huckel has had the opportunity to put its case for consideration on all matters material to the making of the decision to dismiss the application under s.587 (see generally Bond v Carbridge Pty Ltd T/A Carbridge [2024] FWC 1302 at [15]-[16] and the cases cited therein). Ms Huckel has been given ample opportunity to rectify the deficiency in the application however the Commission’s inquiries and warnings have been ignored.

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

The application under s.739 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) made by Ms Penny Huckel on 19 October 2024 is dismissed.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the matter of Penny Huckel's application to the Fair Work Commission, the court was called upon to determine whether the application to resolve a dispute regarding flexible working arrangements was appropriately submitted under the Fair Work Act 2009. Ms. Huckel filed her application on 19 October 2024, requesting the Commission to intervene in her workplace dispute. The Deputy President of the Fair Work Commission, Easton, was tasked with examining whether the application met the requirements set forth in the Act and whether it should be dismissed.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether Ms. Huckel's application complied with the statutory requirements for making such an application under the Fair Work Act. Specifically, the court needed to determine if Ms. Huckel had completed all necessary questions on the application form and provided sufficient information to allow for a proper consideration of her case. The court also had to consider whether the application was frivolous or vexatious, or if it lacked reasonable prospects of success, as outlined in Section 587 of the Act.

Upon review, the Deputy President found that Ms. Huckel's application was incomplete as it did not address crucial questions regarding the legal basis of her claim. Despite multiple communications from the Commission offering assistance and guidance, Ms. Huckel failed to provide the required information by the deadline set. Given that she had been warned about the potential consequences of an incomplete application and had ample opportunity to rectify the deficiency, the Deputy President concluded that the application did not comply with the Act. Therefore, the application was dismissed under Section 587(1)(a) of the Fair Work Act.

The final order of the court was to dismiss Ms. Penny Huckel's application made on 19 October 2024 under Section 739 of the Fair Work Act 2009. The court found that the application was not made in accordance with the Act due to the incomplete information provided by Ms. Huckel despite repeated opportunities to rectify the deficiency.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established