Daniel Quaill v Super Retail Group

[2022] FWC 1325

[2022] FWC 1325

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009

s.394—Unfair dismissal

Daniel Quaill
v

Super Retail Group

(U2022/2255)

VICE PRESIDENT CATANZARITI SYDNEY, 1 JUNE 2022

Application for an unfair dismissal remedy.

1. Daniel Quaill was employed by Super Retail Group from the 24^th of June 2019 until they were dismissed on the 10^th of February 2022.

1. On the 21^st of February 2022, the applicant made an application for a remedy for unfair dismissal under s.394 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act).

1. The respondent objected to the application on the basis that Daniel Quaill was never employed by the respondent and had named the incorrect employer.
   
   

2. The legal business name nominated by the respondent in this matter was Super Retail Group Services Pty Ltd.
   
   

3. On the 12^th of May 2022, correspondence was sent to the applicant in relation to the jurisdictional objections raised by the respondent and they were required to respond by the 19^th of May 2022. No response was received from Daniel Quaill in this time.
   
   

4. On the 20^th of May 2022, further correspondence was sent to the applicant directing them to provide a response by 5:00pm on the 23^rd of May 2022. They were advised that in the absence of a reply their application may be dismissed.

1. To date, Daniel Quaill has not responded to the jurisdictional objections raised by the respondent or any further correspondence sent by my Chambers in writing.

1. 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), 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) FWC may dismiss an application:

(a) on its own initiative; or

(b) on application.

1. The words, “Without limiting when FWC may dismiss an application” at the commencement of s.587(1) of the Act, establish that the jurisdiction of the Commission to dismiss an application is not limited to the circumstances set out in s.587(1)(a), (b) and (c).

1. In the circumstances I have decided to dismiss the application for want of prosecution pursuant to s.587(3)(a) of the Act.

1. An order to that effect will issue with this decision.

VICE PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<PR742063>