| [2022] FWC 2128 |
| FAIR WORK COMMISSION |
| DECISION |
Fair Work Act 2009
s.394—Unfair dismissal
Luke Waibel
v
Safety Xpress Pty Ltd
(U2022/5536)
| VICE PRESIDENT CATANZARITI | SYDNEY, 15 AUGUST 2022 |
Application for an unfair dismissal remedy.
Luke Waibel (the applicant) was employed by Safety Xpress Pty Ltd (the respondent) from the 19th of October 2021 until he was dismissed on the 16th of May 2022.
On the 19th of May 2022, the applicant made an application for a remedy for unfair dismissal under s.394 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act).
The legal business name nominated by the respondent in their F3 – Employer’s Response Form in this matter was The Trustee for Safety Xpress Unit Trust T/As Durasafe.
On the 19th of July 2022, correspondence was sent to the applicant in relation to the legal business name discrepancy and he was required to respond by the 26th of July 2022. No response was received at this time.
To date, the applicant has not responded to any of the correspondence sent by my Chambers.
Section 587 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.
(2) Despite paragraphs (1)(b) and (c), 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) FWC may dismiss an application:
(a) on its own initiative; or
(b) on application.
The words, “Without limiting when FWC may dismiss an application” at the commencement of s.587(1) of the Act, establish that the jurisdiction of the Commission to dismiss an application is not limited to the circumstances set out in s.587(1)(a), (b) and (c).
In the circumstances I have decided to dismiss the application for want of prosecution pursuant to s.587(3)(a) of the Act.
An order to that effect will issue with this decision.
VICE PRESIDENT
Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer
<PR744680>
- AGLC
- Luke Waibel v Safety Xpress Pty Ltd [2022] FWC 2128
- Case
- [2022] FWC 2128
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The Commission had to decide whether to dismiss the application for unfair dismissal on the basis of want of prosecution under section 587 of the Fair Work Act. This section allows the Commission to dismiss an application if it is not made in accordance with the Act, is frivolous or vexatious, or has no reasonable prospects of success. The Commission noted that the dismissal of an application was not limited to the specific circumstances outlined in section 587(1)(a), (b), and (c), but could also occur on its own initiative or on application. Given Waibel's failure to respond to multiple communications, the Commission decided to dismiss the application for want of prosecution.
The Fair Work Commission dismissed the application for unfair dismissal made by Waibel against Safety Xpress Pty Ltd for want of prosecution. This decision was made pursuant to section 587(3)(a) of the Fair Work Act. The Commission found that Waibel's failure to respond to correspondence regarding a discrepancy in the legal business name and his lack of response to subsequent communications justified the dismissal of the application. An order to that effect was issued with the decision.
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.