Buvesh Chadha v Eliott Engineering Pty Ltd

Case [2023] FWC 2297


[2023] FWC 2297

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009

s.394—Unfair dismissal

Buvesh Chadha
v

Eliott Engineering Pty Ltd

(U2023/6948)

COMMISSIONER BISSETT

MELBOURNE, 12 SEPTEMBER 2023

Application for relief from unfair dismissal – minimum employment period – dismissal under s.587 at the Commission’s initiative

  1. On 28 July 2023, Buvesh Chadha (the Applicant) made an application to the Fair Work Commission for a remedy for unfair dismissal pursuant to s.394 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (FW Act).

  1. The Applicant advised in the Form F2 Unfair Dismissal Application (Form F2) that they commenced employment with Eliott Engineering Pty Ltd (the Respondent) on 6 February 2023 and that they were notified of their dismissal on 28 July 2023.

  1. On 9 August 2023, the Commission attempted to contact the Applicant on their nominated telephone number. A voicemail message was left requesting that the Applicant contact the Commission by phone or email, as based on the Form F2, it appeared that the Applicant had not been engaged by the Respondent for the minimum employment period required.

  1. On 11 August 2023, the Commission emailed correspondence to the Applicant’s nominated email address advising the Applicant that, on the basis of the information provided in the Form F2, they had not served the minimum employment period. This correspondence directed the Applicant to file any documents to support their claim that they had served the required minimum employment period. This correspondence also warned that if they did not contact the Commission within 14 days, the application may be dismissed without further notice. An SMS notification was also sent to the Applicant’s nominated telephone number requesting that they contact the Commission.

  1. As no further correspondence was received, on 24 August 2023, the Commission again attempted to contact the Applicant on their nominated telephone number. However, the Applicant could not be reached. A voicemail message was left advising that if the Commission does not receive any further communication from the Applicant by close of business 25 August 2023, the matter will likely be dismissed without further notice and a decision published to this effect.

  1. To date, the Applicant has not provided any further correspondence to the Commission.

  1. Section 382 of the FW Act provides that a person is protected from unfair dismissal if they have completed a period of employment. I am satisfied that the Applicant has not completed the required minimum employment period.

  1. Section 383 of the FW Act sets out the minimum employment period as follows:

383 Meaning of minimum employment period

The minimum employment period is:

(a) if the employer is not a small business employer—6 months ending at the earlier of the following times:

(i) the time when the person is given notice of the dismissal;
(ii) immediately before the dismissal; or

(b) if the employer is a small business employer—one year ending at that time.

  1. Section 587(1) of the FW 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 prospect of success.

  1. As the Applicant has not completed the required minimum employment period under the FW Act, the application has no reasonable prospect of success. As such, the application is dismissed under s.587(1)(c) of the FW Act.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<PR766042>

Details
AGLC
Buvesh Chadha v Eliott Engineering Pty Ltd [2023] FWC 2297
Case
[2023] FWC 2297
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Buvesh Chadha applied to the Fair Work Commission for relief from unfair dismissal, claiming he was dismissed by Eliott Engineering Pty Ltd. The Commission assessed whether Chadha had completed the minimum employment period under the Fair Work Act 2009 before considering the merits of his claim. The Commission found that Chadha had not completed the requisite employment period and dismissed his application without further notice. The Fair Work Commission had to determine whether Chadha had completed the minimum employment period under the Fair Work Act 2009 before addressing the merits of his unfair dismissal claim. The minimum employment period is six months if the employer is not a small business employer, and one year if the employer is a small business employer. Since Eliott Engineering Pty Ltd is not a small business employer, Chadha needed to have been employed for six months before his dismissal on 28 July 2023. Chadha began his employment on 6 February 2023, which was less than six months before his dismissal, indicating he had not met the minimum employment period requirement.

The Commission attempted to contact Chadha multiple times to request documentation proving he had completed the minimum employment period. However, Chadha did not respond to these communications. Consequently, the Commission concluded that Chadha had not completed the required minimum employment period. Section 587(1)(c) of the Fair Work Act 2009 allows the Fair Work Commission to dismiss an application if it has no reasonable prospect of success. Given that Chadha had not completed the minimum employment period, the application had no reasonable prospect of success. Therefore, the Commission dismissed the application under s.587(1)(c) of the Fair Work Act 2009.

Orders

Orders of the court

Full text does not contain this section.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.