Fatmata Bangura v Tienatenee ISS Facility Services Australia

Case [2023] FWC 1318


[2023] FWC 1318

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009

s.394—Unfair dismissal

Fatmata Bangura
v

Tienatenee - ISS Facility Services Australia

(U2023/2402)

VICE PRESIDENT CATANZARITI

SYDNEY, 5 JUNE 2023

Application for an unfair dismissal remedy.

  1. Fatmata Bangura (the applicant) began employment with Tienatenee - ISS Facility Services Australia (the respondent) on the 1st of September 2020.

  1. On the 22nd of March 2023, the applicant made an application for a remedy for unfair dismissal under s.394 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act).

  2. The legal business name nominated by the respondent in their F3 – Employer’s Response Form in this matter was ISS Property Services Pty Ltd.

  3. On the 22nd of May 2023, correspondence was sent to the applicant in relation to the legal business name discrepancy and she was required to respond by the 29th of May 2023. No response was received at this time.

  4. Further correspondence was sent to the applicant on the 30th of May 2023 and she was required to respond by the 2nd of June 2023 at 5:00pm. It was in this correspondence the applicant was notified that if no response was received, her application would be dismissed without any further notice.

  5. To date, the applicant has not responded to any of the correspondence sent by my Chambers.

  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

<PR762791>

Details
AGLC
Fatmata Bangura v Tienatenee ISS Facility Services Australia [2023] FWC 1318
Case
[2023] FWC 1318
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Fair Work Commission dismissed Fatmata Bangura's unfair dismissal claim against Tienatenee - ISS Facility Services Australia due to the applicant's failure to respond to correspondence regarding a discrepancy in the legal business name provided by the respondent. Bangura had commenced employment with the respondent on 1 September 2020 and applied for a remedy for unfair dismissal on 22 March 2023. The respondent identified itself as ISS Property Services Pty Ltd in its response form, and Bangura was required to respond to correspondence sent by the Commission on 22 May 2023 and 30 May 2023, with the latter correspondence notifying her that her application would be dismissed if she failed to respond by 2 June 2023 at 5:00pm. Bangura did not respond to either correspondence, and the Commission dismissed her application for want of prosecution under s.587(3)(a) of the Fair Work Act 2009. The Commission emphasised that the jurisdiction to dismiss an application is not limited to the circumstances set out in s.587(1)(a), (b) and (c), and an order to dismiss the application will issue with this decision.

Orders

Orders of the court

Full text does not contain this section.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.