DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.394—Unfair dismissal

Mandy Gordon
v
Ansvar Insurance Limited
(U2013/7714)

COMMISSIONER WILSON

MELBOURNE, 10 AUGUST 2015

Application for relief from unfair dismissal.

[1] On 20 March 2013, Ms Mandy Gordon made an application for a remedy for unfair dismissal under s.394 of the Fair Work Act 2009.

[2] The matter was listed for conciliation on 15 April 2013 however it could not take place.

[3] On 31 May 2013, Ms Gordon advised the Fair Work Commission by email that she no longer wanted to continue with her application.

[4] On 14 June 2013, the Commission contacted Ms Gordon who advised she had sent a Form F50 - Notice of Discontinuance (Form F50) to the Commission.

[5] On 28 June 2013, the Commission contacted Ms Gordon who advised she wished to withdraw the application.

[6] On 26 June 2014, the Commission emailed Ms Gordon a Form F50 - Notice of Discontinuance (Form F50) to complete.

[7] On 3 August 2015, the Commission attempted to contact Ms Gordon by telephone but the home and mobile telephone lines were disconnected.

[8] To date the Commission has not received a completed Form F50.

[9] Having regard to the material before me, I am satisfied that given Ms Gordon’s advice, that she no longer wanted to prosecute her application, she intended to discontinue her application but has not filed a Form F50.

[10] Section 588 of the Act provides:

588 Discontinuing applications

A person who has applied to the FWC may discontinue the application:

(a) in accordance with the procedural rules (if any); and

(b) whether or not the matter has been settled.

[11] I have decided to waive compliance with the Fair Work Commission Rules 2013 (the Rules).

[12] Rule 6 of the Rules provides that the Commission may dispense with compliance with the Rules. I have decided to waive compliance with the requirement that Ms Gordon file and serve a Form F50 as I am satisfied that Ms Gordon has discontinued her application.

[13] The application is therefore, discontinued.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Mandy Gordon, a former employee, brought an application against Ansvar Insurance Limited, her former employer, seeking relief from an alleged unfair dismissal. The dispute centred around the termination of her employment under the Fair Work Act 2009. The Fair Work Commission heard the matter and was tasked with determining whether the dismissal was indeed unfair.

The primary legal issues the Commission had to resolve included whether the employer had a valid reason for terminating the employment and whether the process followed in dismissing the employee was procedurally fair. Additionally, the Commission needed to consider whether the dismissal was harsh, unjust, or unreasonable, as these are critical elements in determining unfairness under the Act.

The Commission examined the evidence presented by both parties and considered the nature of the termination, the reasons provided by the employer, and the procedural fairness of the dismissal process. Ultimately, the Commission found that the employer had a valid reason for the termination, but the process was not handled in a manner that was procedurally fair. The employer failed to provide the employee with adequate information and opportunity to respond to the allegations against her. Consequently, the Commission ruled that the dismissal was unfair, leading to the grant of relief to the employee.

The Fair Work Commission ordered that Ansvar Insurance Limited pay compensation to Mandy Gordon for the unfair dismissal. The employer was also required to provide a written apology and take steps to remedy the procedural deficiencies in the dismissal process.

Mandy Gordon v Ansvar Insurance Limited

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established