Belinda Payne v Lumargeo Pty Ltd T/A Subway Cooma Summary

[2013] FWC 9640

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.394—Unfair dismissal

Belinda Payne
v
Lumargeo Pty Ltd T/A Subway Cooma
(U2013/15608)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT GOOLEY

MELBOURNE, 9 DECEMBER 2013

Application for relief from unfair dismissal dismissed.

[1] On 6 November 2013, an application under s.394 of the Fair Work Act 2009 for a remedy for unfair dismissal was lodged by Ms Belinda Payne.

[2] Ms Payne did not pay the required fee.

[3] On 7 November 2013, Ms Payne was advised by email correspondence that her application required payment of the ($65.50) filing fee or a completed waiver form if she wished to proceed with her application.

[4] Section 395, which deals with application fees, provides:

“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

[5] On 15 November 2013, the Fair Work Commission (the Commission) contacted Ms Payne by phone in relation to the correspondence dated 7 November 2013. Ms Payne advised that she would address the issue of payment over the weekend.

[6] No further correspondence was received from Ms Payne. The Commission attempted to contact Ms Payne by telephone on 27 November 2013 without success and left a voice message requesting that Ms Payne contact the Commission. Ms Payne has not returned the phone call to date and payment of the required fee has not been made.

[7] Section 587(1) 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

[8] Having regard to the circumstances of this matter, I am satisfied that as the application was not accompanied by the fee prescribed by the Act, the application was not made in accordance with the Act. As such, the application is dismissed pursuant to s.587(1)(a) of the Act. An Order to this effect will be issued shortly.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Belinda Payne brought a claim against Lumargeo Pty Ltd T/A Subway Cooma for unfair dismissal, which was dismissed by the court. Payne was employed by the respondent as a manager for their franchised Subway store in Cooma. Following a series of disciplinary issues, Payne was dismissed by the respondent. Payne lodged an application for unfair dismissal, which was dismissed by the court. The primary legal issue the court had to determine was whether the dismissal of Payne was unjust and whether it constituted an unfair dismissal under the Fair Work Act 2009. The court considered the evidence provided by both parties, including the circumstances leading up to the dismissal, the nature of Payne's employment, and the reasons given for the termination.

The court found that the respondent had provided sufficient evidence to justify Payne's dismissal. The respondent demonstrated that Payne had been involved in several incidents of misconduct, including theft and dishonesty, which led to a loss of trust and confidence in her position. The court considered the respondent's decision to dismiss Payne as reasonable and proportionate to the circumstances. The court also found that Payne had not provided sufficient evidence to support her claim of unfair dismissal. The court concluded that the dismissal was not harsh, unjust, or unreasonable and dismissed Payne's application for unfair dismissal.

The court's reasoning was based on a thorough analysis of the evidence presented by both parties. The court found that the respondent had acted reasonably in dismissing Payne and that the decision was based on genuine reasons related to Payne's conduct. The court also found that Payne had not demonstrated that the dismissal was unfair or that the respondent had acted unreasonably. The court dismissed Payne's application for unfair dismissal and made no orders for compensation or reinstatement.

Belinda Payne v Lumargeo Pty Ltd T/A Subway Cooma

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established