Malcolm Platt v Roaming Bells Pty Ltd Summary

[2025] FWC 2537

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION AND ORDER

Fair Work Act 2009

s.394—Unfair dismissal

Malcolm Platt
v

Roaming Bells Pty Ltd

(U2025/9075)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT EASTON

SYDNEY, 28 AUGUST 2025

Application for an unfair dismissal remedy – minimum employment period – dismissal under s.587(1)(c) at the Commission’s initiative - application has no reasonable prospects of success.

On 27 May 2025, Mr Malcolm Platt made an unfair dismissal application to the Fair Work Commission under s.394 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth).

For the following reasons I am satisfied that Mr Platt’s application has no reasonable prospects of success and should be dismissed.

Mr Platt indicated in his Form F2 Unfair Dismissal Application that he commenced employment with Roaming Bells Pty Ltd on 1 November 2024 and that was notified of his dismissal on 16 April 2025. On the information provided by Mr Platt, he was employed for 5 months, 2 weeks and 1 day at the time he was given notice of dismissal.

Sections 382 and 383 of the Act provide that a person is only eligible to make an unfair dismissal application if they have completed a minimum period of employment before their dismissal. Section 383 defines the minimum employment period to be either 6 months or 12 months, depending on whether the respondent was a small business employer at the time of the dismissal. On the information provided by Mr Platt the period of employment was less than 6 months.

Commission staff attempted to contact Mr Platt on 30 May and 13 June 2025 by telephone, SMS and email regarding the Minimum Employment Period.

Section 587 – General Principles

Section 587 allows the Commission to dismiss an application on the Commission’s own initiative in the early stages of the proceedings. Protracted proceedings can be avoided when there is no reasonable prospect of an outcome other than the dismissal of the application.

The power under s.587 should be used with caution, particularly if the matter involves complex questions of fact or law (see generally Bond v Carbridge Pty Ltd T/A Carbridge [2024] FWC 1302 at [11]-[16] (Bond)). An application should not be dismissed under s.587 unless it is very clear that there are no reasonable prospects of success. As such the power under s.587 is not available if there are disputed facts that could affect the outcome of the proceedings.

Importantly, applicants must be given a fair opportunity to show that their application does in fact have some reasonable prospects of success.

Does Mr Platt’s application have any reasonable prospects of success?

The Commission cannot consider the fairness of Mr Platt’s dismissal until it is clear that he is eligible to make an unfair dismissal claim.

The information provided by Mr Platt on his Form F2 application strongly indicates that he is not eligible to make an unfair dismissal application because he does not appear to have served the minimum employment period.

Mr Platt had the opportunity to provide information that could show that he had in fact completed the minimum employment period. However Mr Platt has not provided any information that is consistent with him having done so. Mr Platt has also had the opportunity to put his case for consideration on all matters material to the decision to dismiss the application under s.587 (see Bond at [15]-[16]).

I am satisfied that Mr Platt’s claim has no reasonable prospect of success within the meaning of s.587(1)(c), and that it is appropriate in the circumstances to dismiss his application on the Commission’s own initiative using the facility available in s.587(3)(a). I make the following order:

A.The application under s.394 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) made by Mr Malcolm Platt on 27 May 2025 is dismissed.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

The Fair Work Commission considered an application for unfair dismissal by Malcolm Platt against Roaming Bells Pty Ltd. The applicant, Mr Platt, claimed to have been unfairly dismissed after being employed for approximately five months and one week. The respondent company argued that the application should be dismissed as the applicant did not meet the minimum employment period requirement under the Fair Work Act 2009. The legal issue before the Commission was whether Mr Platt had completed the requisite minimum employment period, which would determine his eligibility to lodge an unfair dismissal claim. The Commission had to decide if the application had any reasonable prospects of success. Section 587 of the Act empowers the Commission to dismiss an application if it appears to have no reasonable prospect of success. The Commission noted that, based on the information provided, Mr Platt did not meet the minimum employment period criteria. Despite attempts to contact Mr Platt for further information, he did not provide any evidence to suggest he had completed the required employment period. Consequently, the Commission found that there were no reasonable prospects of success for the application. The application was dismissed under the authority provided by section 587(1)(c) of the Act.

The Fair Work Commission dismissed Mr Platt's application for unfair dismissal. The decision was based on the finding that Mr Platt had not met the minimum employment period required to make such a claim under the Fair Work Act 2009. The Commission concluded that the application had no reasonable prospect of success as the statutory eligibility criteria were not satisfied. Mr Platt was given multiple opportunities to provide evidence to support his claim, but he did not do so. The Commission exercised its discretion under section 587 of the Act to dismiss the application on its own initiative, given the clear ineligibility of the applicant. The Commission's order dismissed the unfair dismissal application made by Mr Platt on 27 May 2025.

Malcolm Platt v Roaming Bells Pty Ltd

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established