Ashley Stent v Agnew Gold Mining Company Pty Limited

[2011] FWA 8324

[2011] FWA 8324

FAIR WORK AUSTRALIA

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.394—Unfair dismissal

Ashley Stent
v
Agnew Gold Mining Company Pty Limited
(U2011/8973)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT MCCARTHY PERTH, 1 DECEMBER 2011

Termination of employment.

[1] Mr Ashley Stent (the Applicant) lodged an Application for an unfair dismissal remedy (the Application) on 17 June 2011, asserting that he was unfairly dismissed from his employment with Agnew Gold Mining Company Pty Ltd (the Respondent). The Application was lodged on the Applicant’s behalf by Mr Gary Pinchen of A Whole New Approach Pty Ltd (the Applicant’s Representative).

[2] I dismissed the Application at a hearing this morning where the Applicant failed to attend. These are my edited reasons that I gave at the hearing for dismissing the matter.

[3] On 4 July 2011, an Employer’s Response to the Application (the Response) was lodged by Australian Mines and Metals Association (the Respondent’s Representative) providing a detailed response to the Applicant’s contentions.

[4] A conciliation was conducted by a Fair Work Australia Conciliator. The Application remained disputed.

[5] The Application was allocated to me and I conducted a Directions Conference by telephone. The Applicant's Representative and the Respondent’s Representative participated in that conference and the Applicant was present. It was clear from that conference that matters of fact were disputed and a hearing was needed. On 13 September 2011, I issued Directions requiring the lodgement of material by the Applicant by 3 November 2011. A Notice of Listing for a hearing to be conducted on 1 December 2011 was also issued.

[6] On 2 November 2011, the Applicant’s representative lodged a Notice of a Representative Ceasing to Act. There were no materials lodged by the Applicant as required by the Directions I issued.

[7] On 7 November 2011, the Respondent’s representative lodged an application that the Application be struck out. My Associate informed the Respondent’s Representative that the matter will proceed as listed on 1 December 2011, but that the Respondent was not required to attend. A copy of the email containing that advise was also emailed to the email address provided by the Applicant.

[8] I am satisfied that the Applicant has abandoned the Application. There has been no compliance with the Directions I issued and no other material lodged by the Applicant since that conference. Indeed, there has been no communication from the Applicant since the Directions Conference, other than the notice from the Applicant’s Representative of a ceasing to act for him.

[9] I am also satisfied from the material lodged and the identification of the facts in dispute at that conference that the Respondent has a defence and a defence of substance.

[10] Pursuant to s.587(1) of the Fair Work Act 2009, the Application is dismissed. 1

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Hearing details:

2011.
Perth:
December, 1.

 1   See Sayer v Melstell Pty Ltd [2011] FWAFB 7498 at P19

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<Price code A, PR517381>