Courtney Griffiths v Dbgre Pty Ltd ATF Bell Family Investment Trust T/A Ray White Rockhampton

[2017] FWC 6303

[2017] FWC 6303

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.365—General protections

Courtney Griffiths
v
DBGRE Pty Ltd ATF Bell Family Investment Trust T/A Ray White Rockhampton
(C2016/6698)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT KOVACIC CANBERRA, 29 NOVEMBER 2017

Application to deal with contraventions involving dismissal - invalid application - application dismissed.

[1] Ms Courtney Griffiths made an application which was received by the Fair Work Commission (the Commission) on 11 November 2016 under s.365 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act) alleging that she had been dismissed by DBGRE Pty Ltd ATF Bell Family Investment Trust T/A Ray White Rockhampton (the Respondent) in contravention of the general protections provisions in the Act. Ms Griffiths application was incomplete in that sections of the application were unanswered and no payment of the lodgment fee or application for waiver of the lodgment fee was completed.

[2] On 11 November 2016, the Commission contacted Ms Griffiths by telephone to advise that sections of the application were unanswered and the fee waiver form was unsigned and incomplete. Ms Griffiths did not answer the call and a voice message was left. An email was also sent, asking Ms Griffiths to provide the Commission with a completed application and a completed waiver form or lodgment fee within 14 days or the application may be dismissed.

[3] On 28 November 2016 Ms Griffiths contacted the Commission via telephone and advised that she was unable to complete the application and the application for fee waiver as she had moved interstate and had lost the original documents. The Commission then resent Ms Griffiths her incomplete application and incomplete application for fee waiver by email and post and further advised that her application may be dismissed if the completed waiver or payment of the lodgement fee was not received within 14 days.

[4] The Commission subsequently attempted to contact Ms Griffiths on a number of occasions, i.e. 22 December 2016, 17 May and 19 July 2017. On each occasion it was foreshadowed that Ms Griffiths application may be dismissed unless she completed the application and completed the waiver form or paid the lodgement fee. Despite these repeated attempts to contact Ms Griffiths the Commission has received no completed waiver form or payment of the lodgment fee.

[5] The Commission also has general powers to dismiss an application pursuant to Section 587 of the Act provides:

[6] 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.

(2) Despite paragraphs (1) (b) and (c), the FWC must not dismiss an application under section 365 or 773 on the ground that the application:

(a) is frivolous or vexatious; or

(b) has no reasonable prospects of success.

(3) The FWC may dismiss an application:

(a) on its own initiative; or

(b) on application.”

[7] In relation to an application made pursuant to s.365 of the Act, s.367 provides:

“367 Application fees

(1) The application 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 section 365; and

(b) a method for indexing the fee; and

(c) the circumstances in which all or part of the fee may be waived or

refunded.”

[8] Ms Griffiths has failed to comply with s.367(1) of the Act. Accordingly, her application has not been made in accordance with the Act and is therefore dismissed pursuant to ss.587(1)(a) of the Act. An order to that effect will be issued with this decision.

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<Price code A, PR598164>