Jannat Arora v Trimatic Management Services Pty Ltd

[2023] FWC 106

[2023] FWC 106

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009

s.394—Unfair dismissal

Jannat Arora
v

Trimatic Management Services Pty Ltd

(U2022/12010)

COMMISSIONER BISSETT MELBOURNE, 17 JANUARY 2023

Application for an unfair dismissal remedy

1. On 19 December 2022 Mrs Jannat Arora 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 Mrs Arora did not pay the required fee or file a completed waiver form.

1. On 22 December 2022 the Commission emailed correspondence to Mrs Arora’s representative, Mr Aditya Arora, via his nominated email address advising that the application required payment of the filing fee or a completed waiver form if Mrs Arora wished to proceed with the application. That correspondence also warned that if payment is not made or a waiver form is not received within 7 calendar days the application may be dismissed.

1. On 29 December 2022 the Commission emailed correspondence to Mr Arora’s nominated email address reminding them that the application required payment of the filing fee or a completed waiver form if Mrs Arora wished to proceed with the application. That correspondence also warned that if payment is not made or a waiver form is not received, the application may be dismissed.

1. As a payment or fee waiver form had not been received, on 3 January 2023 the Commission contacted Mr Arora via his nominated telephone number. Mr Arora advised that they were unsure whether to continue with the unfair dismissal application or pursue a different application. Mr Arora requested time to seek legal advice before paying for the filing fee.

1. A final attempt to contact Mr Arora on his nominated telephone number was made by the Commission on 10 January 2023 to obtain payment or a completed waiver form. The call to Mr Arora was not answered. A voicemail message was left advising that payment of the required fee was still outstanding.

1. On 10 January 2023 Mrs Arora was also contacted on her nominated telephone number. Mrs Arora was unsure if Mr Arora had obtained legal advice about the dismissal and confirmed that Mr Arora would contact the Commission to discuss the application.

1. To date there has been no response from Mrs or Mr Arora, 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 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 prospect of success.

1. 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.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<PR749674>