Gordon Kannemeyer v Virtus Diagnostics

Case [2022] FWC 1217


[2022] FWC 1217

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009

s.394—Unfair dismissal

Gordon Kannemeyer
v

Virtus Diagnostics

(U2022/4950)

COMMISSIONER BISSETT

MELBOURNE, 19 MAY 2022

Application for relief from unfair dismissal – incomplete application – dismissal under s.587 at the Commission’s initiative.

  1. On 30 April 2022, Mr Gordon Kannemeyer made an application to the Fair Work Commission for a remedy for unfair dismissal pursuant to s.394 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (FW Act).

  1. The application was incomplete in that Mr Kannemeyer did not pay the required fee or file a completed waiver form.

  1. On 3 May 2022, the Commission attempted to contact Mr Kannemeyer on his nominated telephone number to discuss payment of the required fee however, he did not answer the call. A voicemail message was left requesting a call back to the Commission.

  1. Later that day, the Commission emailed correspondence to Mr Kannemeyer’s nominated email address advising that his application required payment of the filing fee or a completed waiver form, if he wished to proceed with his application. That correspondence also warned that if payment is not made or a waiver form is not received within 14 days, the application may be dismissed.  An SMS notification was also sent to Mr Kannemeyer’s nominated telephone number, advising that there was a problem with his application and requesting he contact the Commission.

  1. A final attempt to contact Mr Kannemeyer was made by the Commission on 16 May 2022 to obtain payment or a completed waiver form. The call was not answered and a voicemail message was left advising him that payment of the required fee was still outstanding.

  1. To date there has been no response from Mr Kannemeyer, the required fee has not been paid and a completed waiver form has not been received.

  1. Section 395 of the FW Act, which deals with application fees, provides as follows:

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. Section 587(1) of the FW 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 prospect of success.

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

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<PR741738>

Details
AGLC
Gordon Kannemeyer v Virtus Diagnostics [2022] FWC 1217
Case
[2022] FWC 1217
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Gordon Kannemeyer filed an application with the Fair Work Commission (FWC) seeking a remedy for unfair dismissal under section 394 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (FW Act). The respondent in this matter is Virtus Diagnostics. The application was incomplete as Mr Kannemeyer did not pay the required application fee or submit a completed waiver form. Despite multiple attempts by the Commission to contact Mr Kannemeyer to address these deficiencies, he did not respond or take any action to remedy the incomplete application.

The primary legal issue before the Commission was whether the application could be dismissed under section 587(1) of the FW Act. Section 587(1) allows the FWC to dismiss an application if it is not made in accordance with the Act, is frivolous or vexatious, or has no reasonable prospect of success. The Commission considered whether the failure to pay the application fee or provide a completed waiver form constituted a failure to comply with the Act.

In reaching its decision, the Commission noted that section 395 of the FW Act requires that an application be accompanied by the prescribed fee. Since Mr Kannemeyer's application did not include the required fee, the Commission concluded that the application was not made in accordance with the Act. Consequently, the application was dismissed under section 587(1)(a) of the FW Act. An order dismissing the application will be issued shortly.

This decision underscores the importance of adhering to the procedural requirements set out in the FW Act when filing an application with the FWC. Failure to comply with these requirements, such as paying the prescribed application fee or providing a completed waiver form, can result in the dismissal of the application.

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.