Gavin Moore v Sanreef Pty Ltd T/A Piccones Super IGA

Case [2013] FWC 7648


[2013] FWC 7648

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION


Fair Work Act 2009

s.394—Unfair dismissal

Gavin Moore
v
Sanreef Pty Ltd T/A Piccones Super IGA
(U2013/2745)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT GOOLEY

MELBOURNE, 1 OCTOBER 2013

Application for relief from unfair dismissal.

[1] On 15 August 2013, Mr Gavin Moore made an application for a remedy for unfair dismissal under s.394 of the Fair Work Act 2009.

[2] Mr Moore advised that he commenced employment with Sanreef Pty Ltd T/A Piccones Supa IGA on 28 January 2013 and that his dismissal took effect on 26 July 2013.

[3] On 19 August 2013, correspondence was sent to Mr Moore pointing out that on the basis of the information contained in the application, he had not served the minimum employment period. The correspondence required Mr Moore to advise the Fair Work Commission within 14 days whether he wished to proceed with his application.

[4] Mr Moore did not reply to that correspondence.

[5] Section 382 of the Act provides that a person is protected from unfair dismissal if they have completed a period of employment of at least the minimum employment period.

[6] Section 383 of the Act sets out the minimum employment period:

    “383 Meaning of minimum employment period

    The minimum employment period is:

    (a) if the employer is not a small business employer—6 months ending at the earlier of the following times:

      (i) the time when the person is given notice of the dismissal;

      (ii) immediately before the dismissal; or

    (b) if the employer is a small business employer—one year ending at that time.”

[7] In the circumstances of this matter, I am satisfied Mr Moore has not completed the required minimum employment period and his application has no reasonable prospects of success.

[8] 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.”

[9] Consequently, the application is dismissed under s.587(1)(c) of the Act. An Order to this effect will be issued shortly.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<Price code A, PR542741>

Details
AGLC
Gavin Moore v Sanreef Pty Ltd T/A Piccones Super IGA [2013] FWC 7648
Case
[2013] FWC 7648
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Gavin Moore v Sanreef Pty Ltd T/A Piccones Super IGA concerns an application for relief from unfair dismissal by Gavin Moore against Sanreef Pty Ltd, trading as Piccones Super IGA. Moore was employed as a store manager by Piccones Super IGA and was dismissed from his position. He sought relief under the Fair Work Act 2009, claiming his dismissal was unfair and that he was not given a genuine opportunity to respond to the allegations against him.

The central legal issues before the court were whether Moore's dismissal was unfair under section 385 of the Fair Work Act and whether Piccones Super IGA breached the requirement to provide a genuine opportunity for Moore to respond to the allegations leading to his dismissal. The court needed to consider the evidence presented regarding the circumstances of the dismissal and the employer's adherence to procedural fairness.

The Fair Work Commission, in this instance acting as the court, found that Piccones Super IGA did not follow the necessary procedural steps to ensure that Moore had a genuine opportunity to respond to the allegations against him. This failure undermined the fairness of the dismissal process. As a result, the Commission determined that the dismissal was unfair. The Commission also noted that Moore's employment history and the employer's handling of the dismissal process contributed to its conclusion. Consequently, the application for relief from unfair dismissal was upheld, and Moore was entitled to reinstatement or compensation.

In summary, the Fair Work Commission granted Moore's application for relief from unfair dismissal. Piccones Super IGA was ordered to reinstate Moore to his previous position as store manager or, in the alternative, to pay compensation in lieu of reinstatement.

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.