Caimin Yu v Foxville Projects Group (NSW) Pty Ltd

Case

[2025] FWC 1985

11 JULY 2025


[2025] FWC 1985

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION AND ORDER

Fair Work Act 2009

s.394—Unfair dismissal

Caimin Yu
v

Foxville Projects Group (NSW) Pty Ltd

(U2024/15248)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT EASTON

SYDNEY, 11 JULY 2025

Application for an unfair dismissal remedy – dismissal under s.587 for want of prosecution.

  1. On 18 December 2024, Mr Caimin Yu made an unfair dismissal application to the Fair Work Commission under s.394 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth).

  1. Mr Yu’s application raised a concern about, in the first instance that Foxville Projects Group (NSW) Pty Ltd being in administration and at later date, about liquidation.

  1. Commission staff tried to contact Mr Yu on 10 February and 16 June 2025 about this concern.

  1. Mr Yu responded on 17 February 2025, however he did not provide any additional relevant information regarding Foxville Projects Group (NSW) Pty Ltd being in administration or liquidation.  There has been no further response since that date.

  1. Section 587 allows the Commission to dismiss an application on the Commission’s own initiative in the early stages of the proceedings for want of prosecution. If an applicant’s conduct or omissions show that they are no longer willing to participate in their own case the Commission is not required to persevere with the application (see Viavattene v Health Care Australia [2013] FWCFB 2532 at [39]).

  1. I am satisfied that Mr Yu has had the opportunity to put a case for consideration on all matters material to the decision to dismiss the application under s.587. In the circumstances I am satisfied that the facility under s.587 can and should be engaged to dismiss Mr Yu’s application. I make the following order:

A.The application under s.394 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) made by Mr Caimin Yu on 18 December 2024 is dismissed.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<PR789127>

Actions
Download as PDF Download as Word Document


Cases Citing This Decision

0

Cases Cited

1

Statutory Material Cited

0