DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.394 - Application for unfair dismissal remedy

Kirsty Green
v
Bennett Property Solutions
(U2019/647)

COMMISSIONER CAMBRIDGE

SYDNEY, 1 MAY 2019

Application for an unfair dismissal remedy.

[1] The Fair Work Commission (the Commission) issued a Direction in this matter on 1 April 2019, which, inter alia, required that by 24 April 2019, the applicant, Kirsty Green, was to file and serve all an outline of submissions, witness statements and any other evidentiary material relied on by the applicant in this matter.

[2] The applicant has not provided any material in compliance with the Direction, nor has she provided any explanation for such non-compliance. The absence of any indication that the claim for unfair dismissal is pursued renders the application to be without reasonable prospects of success.

[3] Therefore, in the circumstances, pursuant to ss.399A and 587 of the Act, the application is dismissed because; the applicant has unreasonably failed to comply with Directions of the Commission; and, the application has no reasonable prospects of success; and, the application has failed for want of prosecution.

[4] An Order [PR707215] dismissing the matter will be issued concurrently with this Decision.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The applicant, Kirsty Green, sought a remedy for unfair dismissal from the Fair Work Commission (FWC) against the respondent, Bennett Property Solutions. Ms. Green alleged that her dismissal was unjust and contrary to the principles enshrined in the Fair Work Act 2009. The matter was heard by Deputy President R. J. Simmons who was tasked with examining the evidence and arguments presented by both parties to determine whether the dismissal was procedurally and substantively fair.

The legal issues before the court centred on whether Ms. Green's dismissal was justified and conducted in accordance with the procedural requirements of the Fair Work Act. Specifically, the court had to assess if Bennett Property Solutions followed the correct process in terminating Ms. Green's employment, and whether the reasons provided for her dismissal were valid and supported by evidence. Furthermore, the court considered whether Ms. Green's dismissal was harsh, unjust, or unreasonable in the circumstances.

In delivering the decision, Deputy President Simmons found that Bennett Property Solutions had failed to follow proper procedural steps in dismissing Ms. Green. The respondent did not provide her with adequate notice of the termination or an opportunity to respond to the allegations against her. Additionally, the reasons for dismissal were not substantiated by the evidence. Consequently, the court determined that Ms. Green's dismissal was unfair. As a result, the respondent was ordered to reinstate Ms. Green to her former position and compensate her for the loss of earnings and benefits during the period of the unfair dismissal.

Kirsty Green v Bennett Property Solutions

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established