| [2023] FWC 2222 |
| FAIR WORK COMMISSION |
| DECISION |
Fair Work Act 2009
s.394—Unfair dismissal
Jaymin Taylor
v
Safehome Security Screens Pty Ltd
(U2023/6534)
| COMMISSIONER BISSETT | MELBOURNE, 7 SEPTEMBER 2023 |
Application for relief from unfair dismissal – incomplete application – dismissal under s.587 at the Commission’s initiative
On 18 July 2023, Jaymin Taylor (the Applicant) 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).
The application form filed by the Applicant was incomplete in that the Applicant did not provide the year they commenced employment with the Respondent, and as the fee waiver application form (Form F80) was not signed.
On 20 July 2023, the Commission attempted to contact the Applicant on their nominated telephone number to request the missing information and to request a completed waiver form (Form F80). The Applicant could not be reached. A voicemail message was left advising of the matter number and the Commission’s contact number, and that further correspondence will be sent.
Later that day, the Commission emailed further correspondence to the Applicant’s nominated email address advising that the waiver form was not signed or dated. This correspondence advised that if a completed waiver form was not provided within 14 days, the application may be dismissed.
As no response was received from the Applicant, on 1 August 2023 the Commission attempted to contact the Applicant on their nominated telephone number. The Applicant could not be reached at the time as the number was engaged.
On 10 August 2023, the Commission received correspondence from the Applicant advising that they had not heard from the Commission about their matter.
On 17 August 2023, the Commission sent correspondence to the Applicant’s nominated email address advising of the Commission’s previous attempts to contact the Applicant. This correspondence requested confirmation of the Applicant’s full employment commencement date with the Respondent, along with a completed waiver form.
To date, no further correspondence has been received from the Applicant.
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.
In these circumstances, I have determined that the application was not made in accordance with the FW Act. As such, the application is dismissed under s.587(1)(a) of the FW Act.
COMMISSIONER
Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer
<PR765800>
- AGLC
- Jaymin Taylor v Safehome Security Screens Pty Ltd [2023] FWC 2222
- Case
- [2023] FWC 2222
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The legal issue before the Commission was whether the application complied with the Fair Work Act. The application was incomplete in two respects: it did not provide the year of employment commencement, and the fee waiver form was unsigned. The Commission attempted multiple times to contact Taylor to request the missing information and a completed fee waiver form, but these attempts were unsuccessful. The question was whether these failures warranted dismissal of the application.
The Commissioner concluded that the application did not comply with the Act because it was incomplete. The Commissioner noted that the Commission had made several attempts to contact Taylor and request the missing information but had not received a response. As the application was not made in accordance with the Act, the Commissioner dismissed the application under section 587(1)(a) of the Fair Work Act. The Commissioner emphasised that the dismissal was not based on the merits of the application, but rather on procedural grounds.
The Fair Work Commission dismissed the application for unfair dismissal made by Jaymin Taylor against Safehome Security Screens Pty Ltd. The application was dismissed because it did not comply with the Fair Work Act, specifically because it was incomplete and the Commission's attempts to contact Taylor for the missing information were unsuccessful. This decision underscores the importance of completing applications accurately and responding to requests for information from the Commission.
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.