Brodie-Leigh Majcenic v Crown Melbourne Limited

[2015] FWC 1731

[2015] FWC 1731

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.394—Unfair dismissal

Brodie-Leigh Majcenic
v
Crown Melbourne Limited
(U2014/13970)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT GOOLEY MELBOURNE, 16 MARCH 2015

Application for relief from unfair dismissal.

[1] On 28 November 2014, Mr Majcenic made an application for remedy for unfair dismissal under s.394 of the Fair Work Act 2009. Mr Majcenic’s employment had been terminated by Crown Melbourne Limited on 7 November 2014.

[2] The matter was listed for conciliation on 23 December 2014, however, it could not take place. Consequently, directions were issued and the matter was listed for hearing.

[3] Mr Majcenic was directed to file an outline of submissions, any witness statements and other documentary material he wished to rely on by noon, on 9 February 2015.

[4] Mr Majcenic did not comply with this direction and the matter was listed for a non compliance hearing before Commissioner Johns on 27 February 2015.

[5] Mr Majcenic did not attend the non compliance hearing. Crown Melbourne Limited made an oral application, pursuant to s.399A of the Act, that the matter be dismissed as Mr Majcenic had failed to comply with the direction of the Fair Work Commission. Commissioner Johns waived compliance with the Fair Work Commission Rules 2013 and accepted Crown Melbourne Limited’s oral application.

[6] On 27 February 2015, Mr Majcenic was sent correspondence informing him of Crown Melbourne Limited’s section 399A application. Mr Majcenic was directed to file submissions and other documentary material in respect of Crown Melbourne Limited’s application by close of business, on Friday 6 March 2015. Mr Majcenic was advised that if he failed to comply with this direction, his application would be dismissed.

[7] Mr Majcenic did not file any material with the Commission.

[8] Section 399A of the Act provides as follows:

399A Dismissing applications

(1) The FWC may, subject to subsection (2), dismiss an application for an order under Division 4 if the FWC is satisfied that the applicant has unreasonably:

(a) failed to attend a conference conducted by the FWC, or a hearing held by the FWC, in relation to the application; or

(b) failed to comply with a direction or order of the FWC relating to the application; or

(c) failed to discontinue the application after a settlement agreement has been concluded.

....
(2) The FWC may exercise its power under subsection (1) on application by the employer.

(3) This section does not limit when the FWC may dismiss an application.

[9] Section 593 of the Act provides that the Commission is not required to hold a hearing except as provided by the Act.

[10] As Mr Majcenic did not file any material in opposition to the application to dismiss, I will determine the application on the papers.

[11] After considering all the material, Mr Majcenic’s application for remedy from unfair dismissal is dismissed. An order giving effect to this decision will be issued today.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<Price code A, PR561951>