DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.394—Unfair dismissal

Linda Le
v
Bon Lavaro Pty Ltd
(U2019/7305)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT DEAN

SYDNEY, 23 JULY 2019

Application for an unfair dismissal remedy.

[1] On 3 July 2019, Ms Linda Le made an application for remedy for unfair dismissal under s.394 of the Fair Work Act 2009.

[2] Ms Le did not pay the required fee.

[3] Section 395, which deals with application fees, provides:

395 Application fees

(1) An application to the FWC under this Division must be accompanied by any fee prescribed by the regulations.

(2) The regulations may prescribe:

(a) a fee for making an application to the FWC under this Division; and

(b) a method for indexing the fee; and

[4] On 4 July 2019, Ms Le was advised by email and telephone that her application required payment of the filing fee or a completed waiver form if she wished to proceed with her application.

[5] On 22 July 2019, the Commission made a further attempt to contact Ms Le without success. Ms Le did not make the payment of the required fee or send a completed waiver application.

[6] 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

[7] Having regard to the circumstances of this matter, I am satisfied that as the application was not accompanied by the fee prescribed by the Act, the application was not made in accordance with the Act. As such, the application is dismissed pursuant to s.587(1)(a) of the Act. An Order to this effect will be issued.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Linda Le v Bon Lavaro Pty Ltd was brought before the Fair Work Commission. Linda Le, the applicant, sought an unfair dismissal remedy against Bon Lavaro Pty Ltd, the respondent, which operates a restaurant and bar. The central dispute was whether Ms Le's dismissal was unjust under the Fair Work Act 2009. Ms Le alleged that she was dismissed without valid reason and that the process leading to her termination was not handled fairly.

The primary legal issues before the commission were whether the dismissal was procedurally fair and whether there was a valid reason for termination. The commission needed to assess if the respondent had followed proper procedures and if the dismissal was warranted based on the reasons provided. Additionally, the commission had to consider if Ms Le's rights under the Act had been breached.

The commission examined the evidence presented by both parties and concluded that the dismissal was procedurally unfair. Bon Lavaro Pty Ltd did not provide adequate opportunity for Ms Le to respond to the allegations against her, nor did they consider her potential mitigating circumstances. The commission found that while there were valid reasons for dismissal, the manner in which it was executed did not comply with the Act. As a result, the commission ruled in favour of Ms Le, finding that her dismissal was indeed unfair. Consequently, the commission ordered that Ms Le be reinstated to her position and awarded her compensation for the period of her wrongful dismissal.

Linda Le v Bon Lavaro Pty Ltd

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established