Kade Benham v Linfox
[2025] FWC 2698
•11 SEPTEMBER 2025
| [2025] FWC 2698 |
| FAIR WORK COMMISSION |
| DECISION AND ORDER |
Fair Work Act 2009
s.394—Unfair dismissal
Kade Benham
v
Linfox
(U2025/9241)
| DEPUTY PRESIDENT EASTON | SYDNEY, 11 SEPTEMBER 2025 |
Application for an unfair dismissal remedy – dismissal under s.587 at the Commission’s initiative for want of prosecution.
On 30 May 2025, Mr Kade Benham made an unfair dismissal application to the Fair Work Commission under s.394 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth).
Mr Benham did not attend a telephone conciliation conference scheduled for 25 June 2025.
Commission staff tried to contact Mr Benham on 25 June, 30 June and 30 July 2025 about whether he wants to continue his unfair dismissal claim. Mr Benham has not responded to the Commission’s inquiries.
Section 587 allows the Commission to dismiss an application on the Commission’s own initiative in the early stages of the proceedings for want of prosecution. If an applicant’s conduct or omissions show that they are no longer willing to participate in their own case the Commission is not required to persevere with the application (see Viavattene v Health Care Australia [2013] FWCFB 2532 at [39]).
I am satisfied that Mr Benham has had the opportunity to put a case for consideration on all matters material to the decision to dismiss the application under s.587. In the circumstances I am satisfied that the facility under s.587 can and should be engaged to dismiss Mr Benham’s application. I make the following order:
A.The application under s.394 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) made by Mr Kade Benham on 30 May 2025 is dismissed.
DEPUTY PRESIDENT
Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer
<PR791653>
0