Joseph Lloyd Laughton v The Trustee for Australis Safety Rail Unit Trust

[2024] FWC 1119

[2024] FWC 1119

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009

s.394—Unfair dismissal

Joseph Lloyd Laughton
v

The Trustee For Australis Safety Rail Unit Trust

(U2023/12763)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT EASTON SYDNEY, 30 APRIL 2024

Application for an unfair dismissal remedy

1. Mr Joseph Lloyd Laughton was employed by The Trustee for Australis Safety Rail Unit Trust until he was dismissed on 20 December 2023. On 20 December 2023, Mr Laughton filed an application for a remedy for unfair dismissal under s.394 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act).

1. A conciliation conference was scheduled on 5 April 2024 however Mr Laughton did not attend.

1. On 8 April 2024, correspondence was sent to Mr Laughton in relation to his non-attendance and he was required to respond by 15 April 2024. Mr Laughton did not respond to this correspondence
   
   

2. Further correspondence was sent to Mr Laughton on 16 April 2024, and he was required to respond by 5:00pm on 19 April 2024. Mr Laughton was also advised that his application may be dismissed without further notice if he did not respond. Mr Laughton did not respond to this correspondence.

1. On 22 April 2024 the Commission attempted to contact Mr Laughton via telephone. However, Mr Laughton could not be reached. A voicemail message was left advising Mr Laughton to respond to the correspondence as soon as possible. The voicemail also warned that if he did not contact the Commission his application would be dismissed without further notice.

1. To date, Mr Laughton has not responded to any of the Commission’s attempts to contact him.

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.

Note: For another power of the FWC to dismiss an application for a remedy for unfair dismissal made under Division 5 of Part 3‑2, see section 399A.

(2) Despite paragraphs (1)(b) and (c), the FWC must not dismiss an application under section 365 or 773, or an application under section 527F that does not consist solely of an application for a stop sexual harassment order, on the ground that the application:

(a) is frivolous or vexatious; or
 (b) has no reasonable prospects of success.

(3) The 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 Mr Laughton’s application on my own initiative for want of prosecution, utilising the facility provided by s.587(3)(a) of the Act.

1. I have separately made an order to this effect (PR774352).

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<PR774351>