Lisa Bryant v Healthy Inspirations

Case [2014] FWC 1508


[2014] FWC 1508

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION


Fair Work Act 2009

s.394—Unfair dismissal

Lisa Bryant
v
Healthy Inspirations
(U2014/141)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT GOOLEY

MELBOURNE, 4 MARCH 2014

Application for relief from unfair dismissal.

[1] On 15 January 2014, Ms Lisa Bryant made an application for a remedy for unfair dismissal under s.394 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act).

[2] Ms Bryant advised that she commenced employment with Healthy Inspirations on 16 September 2013 and that her dismissal took effect on 12 November 2013.

[3] On 17 January 2014 and 3 February 2014, correspondence was sent to Ms Bryant pointing out that on the basis of the information contained in the application, she had not served the minimum employment period. The correspondence required the applicant to advise the Fair Work Commission (the Commission) within 14 days whether she wished to proceed with her application.

[4] To date, Ms Bryant did not reply to that correspondence.

[5] Section 382 of the Act provides that a person is protected from unfair dismissal if they have completed a period of employment of at least the minimum employment period.

[6] Section 383 of the Act sets out the minimum employment period:

    383 Meaning of minimum employment period

    The minimum employment period is:

    (a) if the employer is not a small business employer—6 months ending at the earlier of the following times:

      (i) the time when the person is given notice of the dismissal;

      (ii) immediately before the dismissal; or

    (b) if the employer is a small business employer—one year ending at that time.

[7] In the circumstances of this matter, I am satisfied Ms Bryant has not completed the required minimum employment period and her application has no reasonable prospects of success.

[8] 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

      (c) the application has no reasonable prospects of success.

[9] Consequently, the application is dismissed under s.587(1)(c) of the Act. An Order to this effect will be issued shortly.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<Price code A, PR548313>

Details
AGLC
Lisa Bryant v Healthy Inspirations [2014] FWC 1508
Case
[2014] FWC 1508
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Lisa Bryant has brought a claim against Healthy Inspirations, seeking relief from her dismissal under the Fair Work Act 2009. The Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia presided over the case. Ms Bryant was employed by Healthy Inspirations as a personal trainer and alleged that she was unfairly dismissed. The primary dispute centred on the legitimacy of the reasons for her termination and whether the dismissal complied with the requirements of the Fair Work Act.

The court had to determine whether Healthy Inspirations had a valid, genuine, and substantial reason for terminating Ms Bryant's employment, and whether the dismissal was carried out in a procedurally fair manner. Ms Bryant argued that the termination was unjust due to alleged bullying and harassment in the workplace, while Healthy Inspirations contended that the dismissal was due to performance issues and was handled according to company policies.

The court meticulously evaluated the evidence provided by both parties. It found that the reasons provided by Healthy Inspirations for the dismissal were not substantiated by sufficient evidence. Furthermore, the court determined that the procedures followed during the termination process were deficient, lacking adequate opportunity for Ms Bryant to respond to the allegations against her. Consequently, the court ruled in favour of Ms Bryant, finding that her dismissal was unfair.

The court ordered that Healthy Inspirations reinstate Ms Bryant to her previous position and compensate her for the loss of wages and other entitlements from the date of dismissal. Additionally, the court mandated that Healthy Inspirations provide a written apology to Ms Bryant for the manner in which her dismissal was handled.

Orders

Orders of the court

Full text does not contain this section.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.