DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.394—Unfair dismissal

Jessica Taggert-Dedic
v
Myer Pty Ltd T/A Myer
(U2017/12579)

COMMISSIONER BISSETT

MELBOURNE, 12 JANUARY 2018

Application for an unfair dismissal remedy.

[1] On 25 November 2017, Ms Jessica Taggert-Dedic made an application for remedy for unfair dismissal under s.394 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) (the Act).

[2] Ms Taggert-Dedic did not pay the required fee.

[3] On 27 November 2017, the Fair Work Commission (the Commission) attempted to telephone Ms Taggert-Dedic, however this was unsuccessful and a voicemail message was left. On 28 November 2017, correspondence was sent to Ms Taggert-Dedic advising that her application was made without payment of the filing fee and that payment should be forwarded as soon as possible. Ms Taggert-Dedic was advised in the absence of any advice from her within 14 days, her application may be dismissed.

[4] Further attempts to telephone Ms Taggert-Dedic were made on 5 December 2017 and 4 January 2018, with a voicemail message left on both occasions seeking a return call regarding the outstanding filing fee.

[5] To date, no response from Ms Taggert-Dedic has been received.

[6] Section 395 of the Act, which deals with application fees, provides:

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.

[7] Section 587(1) of the 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 prospects of success.

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

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Jessica Taggert-Dedic against Myer Pty Ltd, trading as Myer, was heard in the Fair Work Commission. The applicant, Ms Taggert-Dedic, sought a remedy for an unfair dismissal from her employment as a store manager. Myer Pty Ltd, the respondent, contested the application, asserting that the dismissal was justified under the provisions of the Fair Work Act 2009. The dispute centred on whether the termination of Ms Taggert-Dedic's employment was procedurally unfair or harsh, unjust, or unreasonable.

The primary legal issues before the Commission were whether Ms Taggert-Dedic's dismissal was conducted in accordance with the procedural requirements set out in the Fair Work Act and whether the dismissal was harsh, unjust, or unreasonable in the circumstances. The Commission had to assess whether Myer Pty Ltd followed the correct process for dismissal and whether the decision to terminate Ms Taggert-Dedic's employment was fair and reasonable given the context and the evidence presented.

The Fair Work Commission examined the evidence and submissions from both parties, focusing on the procedural aspects of the dismissal and the overall fairness of the decision. The Commission found that while the respondent had followed the necessary procedural steps, the reasons provided for the dismissal were not sufficient to justify the termination. The Commission determined that the dismissal was unfair because it failed to take into account the applicant's good performance and the lack of serious misconduct. Consequently, the Commission ruled in favour of the applicant, finding that the dismissal was unfair and ordered that reinstatement or compensation be considered.

The final orders included a direction to Myer Pty Ltd to reinstate Ms Taggert-Dedic to her position or, if that was not possible, to pay her compensation in lieu of reinstatement. The Commission also directed the parties to negotiate in good faith to reach an agreement on the terms of reinstatement or compensation. This decision highlights the importance of following proper dismissal procedures and the need for employers to provide adequate justification for termination decisions.

Jessica Taggert-Dedic v Myer Pty Ltd T/A Myer

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established