Jake McClelland v Early Childhood Australia NT

Case [2022] FWC 31


[2022] FWC 31

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009

s.394—Unfair dismissal

Jake McClelland
v

Early Childhood Australia NT

(U2021/11459)

COMMISSIONER BISSETT

MELBOURNE, 11 JANUARY 2022

Application for an unfair dismissal remedy

  1. On 10 December 2021 Mr Jake McClelland 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). Mr McClelland allege he was unfairly dismissed by Early Childhood Australia NT (the Respondent) on 19 November 2021.

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

  1. On 15 December 2021 the Commission attempted to contact Mr McClelland on his nominated telephone number to discuss payment of the required fee. Mr McClelland answered the call and said he would call back later to make payment.

  1. Later that day, the Commission emailed correspondence to Mr McClelland’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 the application. That correspondence also warned that if payment was not made or a waiver form was not received within 14 days, the application may be dismissed.

  1. A final attempt to contact Mr McClelland was made by the Commission on 30 December 2021 to obtain payment or a completed waiver form. The call was not answered, and a voicemail message was left advising Mr McClelland that payment of the required fee was still outstanding.

  1. To date there has been no response from Mr McClelland, 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[1] to this effect will be issued shortly.

COMMISSIONER


[1] PR737374.

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<PR737373>

Details
AGLC
Jake McClelland v Early Childhood Australia NT [2022] FWC 31
Case
[2022] FWC 31
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In this matter, the applicant, Mr Jake McClelland, sought a remedy for unfair dismissal from Early Childhood Australia NT (the Respondent). The application was made to the Fair Work Commission under s.394 of the Fair Work Act 2009. The applicant alleged he was unfairly dismissed by the Respondent on 19 November 2021. The legal issues before the Commission were whether the application was made in accordance with the FW Act, and whether it was frivolous or vexatious, or had no reasonable prospect of success. The applicant did not pay the required fee or file a completed waiver form, and despite attempts by the Commission to contact the applicant, no payment or waiver form has been received.

The Commission considered that the application was not made in accordance with the FW Act as it was not accompanied by the required fee. The Commission also found that the application was not frivolous or vexatious, nor did it have no reasonable prospect of success. However, the failure to make the application in accordance with the FW Act was sufficient grounds to dismiss the application. The Commission had regard to s.587(1)(a) of the FW Act, which allows the dismissal of an application if it is not made in accordance with the Act. The Commission was satisfied that the application did not comply with the FW Act and was therefore dismissed.

The Commission ordered that the application be dismissed and an order to this effect would be issued shortly. The Commission emphasised the importance of complying with the FW Act and the requirement to pay the prescribed fee or file a completed waiver form when making an application for an unfair dismissal remedy. The dismissal of the application did not preclude the applicant from making a new application that complied with the FW Act.

This decision highlights the importance of following the procedural requirements when making an application to the Fair Work Commission. Failure to comply with the FW Act, such as not paying the required fee or filing a completed waiver form, can result in the dismissal of the application. Applicants are reminded to carefully read the requirements of the FW Act and ensure that their application complies with the necessary procedural steps.

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.