Gurmeet Kaur Rimpy v Hamilton Simmons Summary

[2023] FWC 141

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009

s.394—Unfair dismissal

Gurmeet Kaur Rimpy
v

Hamilton Simmons

(U2019/366)

COMMISSIONER BISSETT

MELBOURNE, 19 JANUARY 2023

Application for an unfair dismissal remedy

On 10 January 2019 Ms Gurmeet Kaur Rimpy (the Applicant) made an application for remedy for unfair dismissal under s.394 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the FW Act) alleging she was unfairly dismissed by Hamilton Simmons (the Respondent).

On 13 February 2019 the Commission was made aware that the Respondent had entered external administration. On 29 April 2019 a Decision[1] was issued staying the matter until leave of a Court was granted.

On 6 January 2023 the Commission sent correspondence to Ms Rimpy’s nominated email address advising her that her matter is at risk of being dismissed as it is apparent she does not intend to seek the leave of the Court. Ms Rimpy was asked to reply by 12.00 pm 13 January 2023.

The Commission has not received any correspondence from Ms Rimpy.

Section 587 of the FW 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.

In the circumstances where leave of the Court is required to proceed, and that leave has not been sought by Ms Rimpy, I am satisfied that Ms Rimpy’s application has no reasonable prospects of success.

As such, I order that the application be dismissed pursuant to s.587(1)(c) of the FW Act.

COMMISSIONER

[1] [2019] FWC 2850

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Gurmeet Kaur Rimpy filed an application under section 394 of the Fair Work Act 2009, alleging she was unfairly dismissed by Hamilton Simmons. The application was made on 10 January 2019 and was subsequently stayed by the Fair Work Commission on 29 April 2019 due to the Respondent entering external administration. On 6 January 2023, the Commission informed Ms Rimpy that her matter was at risk of being dismissed, as it appeared she had no intention of seeking the leave of the Court. Despite a request for a response by 12.00 pm on 13 January 2023, no correspondence was received from Ms Rimpy.

The legal issue before the Commission was whether Ms Rimpy's application for unfair dismissal remedy had any reasonable prospects of success, particularly in light of the requirement for leave from a Court due to the Respondent's external administration. The Commission considered section 587 of the Fair Work Act, which allows for the dismissal of an application if it does not comply with the Act, is frivolous or vexatious, or has no reasonable prospects of success. In this case, the Commission determined that the application had no reasonable prospects of success due to the absence of any action from Ms Rimpy to seek the necessary leave of the Court.

In reaching its decision, the Commission noted that the application had not been made in accordance with the Act, given the requirement for Court leave and the absence of any action to obtain it. The Commission was satisfied that the application had no reasonable prospects of success under section 587(1)(c) of the Fair Work Act. Consequently, the Commission ordered the dismissal of the application.

The final orders of the Commission were that the application for unfair dismissal remedy be dismissed pursuant to section 587(1)(c) of the Fair Work Act. This decision effectively concludes Ms Rimpy's application for unfair dismissal against Hamilton Simmons, given the lack of action to seek the required Court leave.

Gurmeet Kaur Rimpy v Hamilton Simmons

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established