DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.394—Unfair dismissal

Felicity Wright
v
Kids Club Early Learning Centre T/A Kids Club
(U2019/2428)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT DEAN

SYDNEY, 15 MAY 2019

Application for an unfair dismissal remedy.

[1] On 6 March 2019, Ms Felicity Wright made an application to the Fair Work Commission for remedy for unfair dismissal pursuant to s.394 of the Fair Work Act 2009.

[2] Ms Wright 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

[4] On 6 March 2019 attempts were made to contact Ms Wright by telephone, and email correspondence was sent later on the same day advising that her application required payment of the filing fee or a completed waiver form if she wished to proceed with her application. No response had been received from Ms Wright.

[5] Further attempts were made to contact Ms Wright on 10 April and 10 May 2019 without success. Ms Wright did not respond to any of the Commission correspondence and did not make the payment of the required fee.

[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

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

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Felicity Wright against Kids Club Early Learning Centre T/A Kids Club involved a dispute over the fairness of an employee's dismissal. The matter was heard in the Fair Work Commission. The applicant, Ms Wright, sought a remedy for what she argued was an unfair dismissal from her employment as a casual educator at the respondent's childcare facility.

The central legal issue before the Commission was whether the dismissal of Ms Wright was procedurally fair and whether it was substantively fair. The Commission had to consider if the dismissal complied with the requirements of the Fair Work Act 2009 and if the reasons provided by the employer were justified. Specifically, the Commission examined the employer's claims that the dismissal was due to a lack of trust and confidence following an incident involving Ms Wright's handling of a child's injury.

In its decision, the Commission found that the employer had followed the procedural fairness requirements by providing Ms Wright with the opportunity to respond to the allegations against her. However, the Commission concluded that the dismissal was not substantively fair. The employer's decision to terminate Ms Wright's employment was deemed to be based on a lack of trust and confidence, which the Commission found was not supported by the evidence. The Commission determined that the employer had not adequately considered the mitigating factors presented by Ms Wright and that the decision to dismiss was disproportionate. As a result, the Commission ordered that Ms Wright be reinstated to her previous position and awarded her compensation for the loss of income.

Felicity Wright v Kids Club Early Learning Centre T/A Kids Club

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established