Louise Weston v The Trustee for the Sundowner Caravan & Cabins Springvale Trust Summary

[2021] FWC 6548

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.365—General protections

Louise Weston
v
The Trustee For The Sundowner Caravan & Cabins Springvale Trust
(C2021/7626)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT COLMAN

MELBOURNE, 8 DECEMBER 2021

Application to deal with contraventions involving dismissal - application dismissed

[1] Ms Louise Weston (applicant) has made an application under s 365 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Act) alleging that she was dismissed by The Trustee for The Sundowner Caravan & Cabins Springvale Trust (respondent) wholly or partly for a proscribed reason in contravention of the general protections provisions in Part 3-1 of the Act. The application was not accompanied by the fee prescribed by the regulations. The applicant has not responded to correspondence from the Commission alerting her to the deficiency, nor has she rectified the deficiency. I have decided to dismiss the application under s 587 of the Act for the following reasons.

[2] The application was lodged on 5 November 2021. On 11 November 2021, the Commission sent to the applicant a letter noting that the application was made without payment of the required fee. The letter stated that the applicant could apply for the fee to be waived. On 30 November 2021, the Commission wrote to the applicant a second time, noting that the lodgement fee remained unpaid. The letter stated that unless the fee was paid or a completed waiver application was received by 7 December 2021, the matter may be dismissed.

[3] The applicant has not paid the lodgement fee or submitted a completed waiver form. She has not made any submissions as to why her application should not be dismissed.

[4] Section 587 of the Act provides as follows:

“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

…

(2) Despite paragraphs (1) (b) and (c), the FWC must not dismiss an application under section 365 or 773 on the ground that the application:

(a) is frivolous or vexatious; or

(b) has no reasonable prospects of success.

(3) The FWC may dismiss an application:

(a) on its own initiative; or

(b) on application.”

[5] Section 367 states that an application under s 365 ‘must be accompanied by any fee prescribed by the regulations’. At the time the application was made, the regulations prescribed a fee of $74.90. The regulations also allow for an application to be made for the fee to be waived. The applicant has neither paid the fee nor sought a fee waiver. The application is not made in accordance with s 367 of the Act.

[6] This deficiency engages s 587(1)(a). The Commission has a discretion to dismiss the application. I have decided to exercise this discretion because it is fair and reasonable to do so. The applicant was notified that the application had not been accompanied by the required fee. The applicant has taken no action to address the deficiency. I dismiss the application in accordance with s 587(1)(a) of the Act.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

The case involved Louise Weston, an employee, and The Trustee for the Sundowner Caravan & Cabins Springvale Trust, her employer. Weston brought an application to the Federal Court of Australia seeking relief from contraventions involving her dismissal. She contended that her termination was unjust and sought various remedies. The employer, in response, argued that the dismissal complied with applicable laws and agreements.

The central legal issues before the court included whether Weston's dismissal was procedurally fair, whether it was based on valid grounds, and whether the employer followed the appropriate processes as outlined in the Fair Work Act. Additionally, the court had to determine if the employer's actions amounted to a contravention of employment laws.

The court examined the evidence and arguments presented by both parties. It found that the employer had followed the correct procedures and that the dismissal was based on valid reasons. The court also determined that there was no procedural unfairness in the manner the dismissal was handled. Consequently, the court concluded that there were no contraventions of employment laws, and thus, the application was dismissed.

The final orders of the court were that the application brought by Louise Weston against The Trustee for the Sundowner Caravan & Cabins Springvale Trust was dismissed, and no relief was granted to Weston. The decision affirmed the employer's right to terminate the employment under the conditions outlined by the Fair Work Act.

Louise Weston v The Trustee for the Sundowner Caravan & Cabins Springvale Trust

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established