Madeline Stenner-Richardson v Hairmoves

[2015] FWC 5031

[2015] FWC 5031

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.365—General protections

Madeline Stenner-Richardson
v
Hairmoves
(C2015/2451)

COMMISSIONER GREGORY MELBOURNE, 24 JULY 2015

Application to deal with contraventions involving dismissal.

[1] On 9 April 2015 Ms Madeline Stenner-Richardson made an application pursuant to s.365 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (“the Act”) alleging she was dismissed by Hairmoves in contravention of Part 3-1 of the Act.

[2] The matter was listed for conference on 25 June 2015. The Applicant failed to attend the conference. The Commission attempted to contact her by telephone however the telephone number provided on the Application did not belong to Ms Stenner-Richardson.

[3] My chambers wrote to Ms Stenner-Richardson on 25 June 2015 stating:

“This matter was listed for conference before Commissioner Gregory today at 2:00pm and a notice was sent to you to this effect on 12 June 2015. This notice is attached for your information.

I have tried to contact you on the telephone number you provided on your application but have been advised that the number is incorrect. The number you provided was (number removed).

Can you please contact me as soon as possible to confirm if you intend to proceed with your s.365 application against Hairmoves.”

[4] After receiving no response, my chambers again wrote to Ms Stenner-Richardson on 3 July 2015. This correspondence was sent both by email and by post, it stated:

“I refer to the below email and request a response as soon as possible. I am also posting a copy of this email to you to ensure you receive it.”

[5] No response was received to this further correspondence.

[6] Section 587 of the Act states:

“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.

Note: For another power of the FWC to dismiss an application for a remedy for unfair dismissal made under Division 5 of Part 3-2, see section 399A.

(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.”

[7] Having received no response from Ms Stenner-Richardson after all reasonable attempts to contact her have been made, I am satisfied that she has not properly prosecuted her application.

[8] This application is dismissed under s.587(3)(a) of the Act. An order giving effect to this Decision will be issued accordingly.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<Price code A, PR569749>