Jordan Saunders v KFC Raymond Terrace T/A Raymond Family Partnership

[2022] FWC 1460

[2022] FWC 1460

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009

s.394—Unfair dismissal

Jordan Saunders
v

KFC Raymond Terrace T/A Raymond Family Partnership

(U2022/3235)

VICE PRESIDENT CATANZARITI SYDNEY, 10 JUNE 2022

Application for an unfair dismissal remedy.

1. Jordan Saunders was employed by KFC Raymond Terrace from the 8^th of July 2020 until they were dismissed on the 25^th of February 2022.

1. On the 16^th of March 2022, the applicant made an application for a remedy for unfair dismissal under s.394 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act).

1. The respondent objected to the application on the basis that Jordan Saunders has named the incorrect employer in their Unfair Dismissal Claim under s.394 of the Fair Work Act 2009.
   
   

2. On the 26^th of May 2022, correspondence was sent to the applicant in relation to the jurisdictional objections raised by KFC Raymond Terrace and they were required to respond by the 2^nd of June 2022. No response was received from Jordan Saunders at this time.
   
   

3. On the 3^rd of June 2022, further correspondence was sent to the applicant directing them to provide a response by 5:00pm on the 8^th of June 2022. They were advised that in the absence of a reply their application may be dismissed.

1. To date, Jordan Saunders has not responded to the jurisdictional objections raised by the respondent or any further correspondence sent by my Chambers in writing.

1. Section 587 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.

(2) Despite paragraphs (1)(b) and (c), FWC must not dismiss an application under section 365 or 773 on the ground that the application:

(a) is frivolous or vexatious; or

(b) has no reasonable prospects of success.

(3) FWC may dismiss an application:

(a) on its own initiative; or

(b) on application.

1. The words, “Without limiting when FWC may dismiss an application” at the commencement of s.587(1) of the Act, establish that the jurisdiction of the Commission to dismiss an application is not limited to the circumstances set out in s.587(1)(a), (b) and (c).

1. In the circumstances I have decided to dismiss the application for want of prosecution pursuant to s.587(3)(a) of the Act.

1. An order to that effect will issue with this decision.

VICE PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<PR742512>