Daniele Lutzu v Lee T/A Skybury

[2016] FWC 2249

[2016] FWC 2249

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.365—General protections

Daniele Lutzu
v
Lee T/A Skybury
(C2016/2464)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT KOVACIC CANBERRA, 8 APRIL 2016

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

[1] Mr Daniele Lutzu (the Applicant) made an application which was received by the Fair Work Commission (the Commission) on 3 February 2016 under s.365 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act) alleging that he had been dismissed by Lee T/A Skybury (the Respondent) in contravention of the general protections provisions in the Act. Mr Lutzu’s application was incomplete in that his waiver application was incomplete.

[2] On 4 February 2016, the Commission contacted Mr Lutzu via telephone to advise him that his waiver application was incomplete. Mr Lutzu did not answer the call. A letter was also sent asking Mr Lutzu to provide the Commission with either the completed waiver form or the lodgment fee within 14 days or the application may be dismissed.

[3] The Commission subsequently attempted to contact Mr Lutzu on a number of occasions, i.e. 18 February and 3, 18 and 22 March by telephone, letter and email regarding his application and incomplete waiver form. On each occasion it was foreshadowed that Mr Lutzu’s application may be dismissed unless he completed the completed waiver form or paid the lodgement fee. Despite these repeated attempts to contact Mr Lutzu the Commission has received no completed waiver form or payment of the lodgment fee.

[4] 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.

Note: For another power of the FWC to dismiss an application for a remedy for unfair dismissal made under Division 5 of Part 3 2, see section 399A.

(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:

(c) on its own initiative; or
(d) on application.”

[5] 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.”

[6] Mr Lutzu has failed to comply with s.367(1) of the Act. Accordingly, his 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, PR578907>