Beau Threadgate v Bells Island Oysters

[2025] FWC 327

[2025] FWC 327

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009

s.394—Unfair dismissal

Beau Threadgate
v

Bells Island Oysters

(U2024/13590)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT EASTON SYDNEY, 6 FEBRUARY 2025

Application for an unfair dismissal remedy – lack of prosecution – dismissal under s.587(3)(a) at the Commission’s initiative - application has no reasonable prospects of success.

1. On 14 November 2024, Mr Beau Threadgate made an unfair dismissal application to the Fair Work Commission under s.394 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth).

1. A conciliation conference was scheduled on 4 December 2024, however Mr Threadgate did not attend.

1. Since then Mr Threadgate has not responded to any of the Commission’s attempts to contact him.

1. Section 587 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.

…

(3)       The FWC may dismiss an application:

(a)       on its own initiative; or

(b)       on application.”

1. The words, “Without limiting when the FWC may dismiss an application” at the commencement of s 587(1) of the Act establish that the jurisdiction of the Commission to dismiss an application is not limited to the circumstances set out in s 587(1).

1. Section 587 allows the Commission to dismiss an application if it is apparent that the applicant has stopped pursuing or participating in the proceedings they commenced. In such circumstances, the Commission is not required to persevere with the application (see Viavattene v Health Care Australia [2013] FWCFB 2532 at [39]).

1. In these circumstances I am satisfied that the facility under s.587 can and should be engaged to dismiss Mr Threadgate’s application.

1. Mr Threadgate has also been on notice of the likely consequences for his application if he did not respond to the Commission’s inquiry. It is quite possible that he has abandoned his application.

1. For these reasons I have decided to dismiss Mr Threadgate’s application for want of prosecution, utilising the facility provided by s.587(3)(a) of the Act.

1. I have separately made an order to this effect (PR784037).

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<PR784036>