Marija Wesson v Metcash Trading Limited
[2024] FWC 566
•1 March 2024
| [2024] FWC 566 |
| FAIR WORK COMMISSION |
| DECISION |
Fair Work Act 2009
s.394—Unfair dismissal
Marija Wesson
v
Metcash Trading Limited
(U2023/12326)
| COMMISSIONER MCKINNON | SYDNEY, 1 MARCH 2024 |
Application for an unfair dismissal remedy – s.399A dismissal
On 11 December 2023, Ms Marija Wesson applied for an unfair dismissal remedy under s.394 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act) in relation to her former employment with Metcash Trading Limited (Metcash).
On 26 February 2024, Metcash applied under s.399A of the Act for dismissal of Ms Wesson’s application. Ms Wesson was invited to advise whether she wished to be heard on the application by close of business on Thursday, 29 February 2024. No response was received.
I am satisfied that Ms Wesson has unreasonably failed to comply with a direction of the Commission relating to the application. The relevant facts are these:
On 16 January 2024, Ms Wesson and Metcash participated in a conciliation conference in the Commission. Ms Wesson left the conference without explanation before it had concluded, and the matter was not resolved.
On 31 January 2024, I issued Directions for the filing of evidence and submissions in the case, listed the matter for conciliation on 19 February 2024 and set a hearing date in relation to the application. Among other things, the Directions required Ms Wesson to file an outline of submissions, any witness statements and other evidentiary material on which she wished to rely, by 14 February 2024. The Directions were later amended to adjust the hearing date only. The balance of the Directions remained unaltered.
Ms Wesson did not file any evidence or submissions in accordance with the Directions by 14 February 2024.
On 19 February 2024, Ms Wesson did not attend the listed conciliation in accordance with the Directions.
No explanation has been provided by Ms Wesson about the reasons for her non-compliance with the Directions. Ms Wesson has not responded to multiple attempts to contact her in relation to the application by the Commission and her non-compliance with the Directions. It is not reasonable, in the circumstances, to allocate further public resources to the handling of her case. Nor is it fair to put Metcash to the time and expense of having to defend a case that appears to have been abandoned.
The application by Metcash under s.399A of the Act for dismissal of the application by Ms Wesson under s.394 of the Act is granted.
Order
Application U2023/12326 is dismissed.
COMMISSIONER
Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer
<PR771994>
0
0
0