George Jackson v Wagner Corporation

[2024] FWC 2562

[2024] FWC 2562

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION AND ORDER

Fair Work Act 2009

s.372—General protections

George Jackson
v

Wagner Corporation

(C2024/4952)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT EASTON SYDNEY, 18 SEPTEMBER 2024

Application to deal with other contraventions dispute – application dismissed.

1. On 18 July 2024 Mr George Jackson made a general protections application not involving dismissal to the Fair Work Commission under s.372 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) with the assistance of Recover Legal.

1. For the following reasons I am satisfied that Mr Jackson’s application has not been made in accordance with the Act and that it is appropriate to dismiss the application.

1. Section 395 of the Act is in the following terms:

“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.”

1. Mr Jackson’s application was incomplete because he did not pay the required fee or file a completed request to waive the fee.

1. The Commission staff contacted Mr Jackson and his representative on the following dates:

   ·   23 July 2024 by email;

   ·   24 July 2024 by SMS;

   ·   26 July 2024 by email;

   ·   6 August 2024 by SMS and telephone;

   ·   8 August 2024 by SMS and telephone; and

   ·   4 September 2024 by telephone.

1. Mr Jackson was advised that he must pay the filing fee or apply for a waiver if he wished to proceed with the application. Mr Jackson was also warned that the application could be dismissed if the filing fee was not paid.

1. To date there has been no response from Mr Jackson, no fee paid, and no waive request received.

1. Section 587 of the Act provides as follows:

“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.

…

(3) The FWC may dismiss an application:

(a) on its own initiative; or

(b) on application.”

1. Mr Jackson’s application was not made in accordance with the Act (per s.587(1)(a)) because the prescribed fee (per s.395) has not been paid or waived. Section 587 confers a discretion on the Commission to dismiss Mr Jackson’s application.

1. Mr Jackson has been given ample opportunity to rectify the deficiency in the application (see generally Bond v Carbridge Pty Ltd T/A Carbridge [2024] FWC 1302 at [15]-[16] and the cases cited therein). The Commission’s inquiries and warnings have largely been ignored.

1. In the circumstances I am satisfied that Mr Jackson’s application should be dismissed.

1. I order that Mr Jackson’s application be dismissed.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<PR779385>