Jianing Wang v Iconic Hotels Management Unit Trust

[2024] FWC 1882

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009

s.365—General protections

Jianing Wang
v

Iconic Hotels Management Unit Trust and another

(C2024/3875)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT COLMAN

MELBOURNE, 18 JULY 2024

Section 365 – jurisdictional objection dismissed

Jianing Wang (applicant) made an application under s 365 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Act). Iconic Hotels Management Unit Trust (respondent) objected to the application on the basis that it did not dismiss the applicant. At the jurisdictional hearing earlier today, I explained to the parties that it was very clear that the respondent had dismissed the applicant, and the respondent accepted that this was the case. The jurisdictional objection was dismissed. I then proceeded to deal with the matter as required by s 368. The Commission’s function in relation to this application has now concluded.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Hearing details:

2024
Melbourne
18 July

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Jianing Wang, an applicant, brought an application against Iconic Hotels Management Unit Trust under section 365 of the Fair Work Act 2009, citing general protections. The respondent, Iconic Hotels Management Unit Trust, initially objected to the application on the grounds that it had not dismissed the applicant. The case was heard before Deputy President Colman in Melbourne on 18 July 2024.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the respondent had, in fact, dismissed the applicant, as was claimed. This was crucial to determine the court's jurisdiction over the matter. During the jurisdictional hearing, Deputy President Colman clarified to both parties that it was evident from the evidence presented that the respondent had indeed dismissed the applicant. Upon this clarification, the respondent conceded that the dismissal had occurred.

Given the respondent's acceptance of the dismissal, the jurisdictional objection was dismissed, and the matter proceeded under section 368 of the Fair Work Act. The Commission's role in this specific application was thus concluded with this decision.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established