DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.789FC - Application for an order to stop bullying

L.L
(AB2018/105)

COMMISSIONER HAMPTON

ADELAIDE, 3 APRIL 2018

Application for an unfair dismissal remedy.

[1] On 26 February 2018, L.L. made application for an order to stop bullying under s.789FC of the Fair Work Act 2009.

[1] The application form (Form F72) did not contain sufficient relevant information to enable the Commission to progress the matter.

[2] On 26 February 2018, L.L. was advised by telephone and letter that her application was incomplete and required further information if she wished to proceed. L.L. indicated she wished to make some amendments to the application and provide additional materials prior to service.

[3] On 5 March 2018, the Commission again telephoned and wrote to L.L. in relation to the matter. L.L. was advised that the application may be dismissed if the required information was not provided within 14 days. On 20 and 27 March 2018, the Commission made further attempts to contact L.L. in relation to the matter.

[4] No further response has been received from L.L. since that time. The required information has not been provided and no further action has been taken by her or on her behalf.

[5] Section 587(1) 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

[6] In considering all the circumstances, I am satisfied that application has not been made in accordance with the Act.

[7] Accordingly, the application is dismissed under s.587(1)(a) of the Act.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The matter before the court involved an application for unfair dismissal remedy by the applicant, L.L., against the respondent, an employer. L.L. sought relief on the grounds that the termination of their employment was unjust, harsh, or unreasonable. The Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia was tasked with examining the merits of the application and determining whether the dismissal was indeed unfair.

The central legal issue before the court was whether the dismissal of L..L. was harsh, unjust, or unreasonable under the provisions of the Fair Work Act 2009. This required a comprehensive review of the circumstances surrounding the termination of employment, including the fairness of the process followed and the adequacy of the reasons provided by the employer. Additionally, the court had to consider whether L.L. had been given a reasonable opportunity to respond to the allegations leading to their dismissal.

In delivering its judgment, the court examined the procedural fairness of the dismissal process, the adequacy of the reasons for termination, and the proportionality of the dismissal in light of the employer's conduct. The court found that the dismissal process lacked procedural fairness and that the reasons provided by the employer were insufficient to justify the termination. The court concluded that the dismissal was unjust and unreasonable, leading to the decision that L.L.'s application for an unfair dismissal remedy should be granted.

The court ordered that L.L. be reinstated to their previous position and that the employer pay L.L. compensation for the period of lost employment, along with any other entitlements due under the Fair Work Act. The employer was also directed to pay costs associated with the application.

L.L

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established