Daniel Thomas v Jarrod Rossiter

[2019] FWC 3647

[2019] FWC 3647

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.394—Unfair dismissal

Daniel Thomas
v
Jarrod Rossiter
(U2019/4368)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT DEAN SYDNEY, 28 MAY 2019

Application for an unfair dismissal remedy.

[1] On 16 April 2019, Mr Daniel Thomas made an application for remedy for unfair dismissal under s.394 of the Fair Work Act 2009.

[2] Mr Thomas did not pay the required fee.

[3] Section 395, which deals with application fees, provides:

395 Application fees

(1) An application to the FWC under this Division 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 this Division; 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.

[4] On 17 April 2019, the Commission made an unsuccessful attempt to contact Mr Thomas by telephone and written correspondence was sent to him on 18 April 2018 advising that his application required payment of the filing fee or a completed waiver form if he wished to proceed with his application. Mr Thomas did not respond nor send a completed waiver application.

[5] Further attempts were made to contact Mr Thomas on 10 and 24 May 2019 without success. A voicemail message was left on 24 May 2019 advising Mr Thomas that in the absence of any response being received, his application may be dismissed. No response was received from Mr Thomas and payment of the required fee has not been made.

[6] Section 587(1) 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.

[7] Having regard to the circumstances of this matter, I am satisfied that as the application was not accompanied by the fee prescribed by the Act, the application was not made in accordance with the Act. As such, the application is dismissed pursuant to s.587(1)(a) of the Act. An Order to this effect will issue with this decision.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<PR708719>