Matangaro Putai v Regis T/A Regis Wentworth Manor

[2015] FWC 4387

[2015] FWC 4387

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.394—Unfair dismissal

Matangaro Putai
v
Regis T/A Regis Wentworth Manor
(U2015/3894)

COMMISSIONER WILSON MELBOURNE, 6 JULY 2015

Application for relief from unfair dismissal.

[1] On 11 March 2015, Ms Matangaro Putai made an application for remedy for unfair dismissal under s.394 of the Fair Work Act 2009. Ms Putai’s employment had been terminated by Regis T/A Regis Wentworth Manor on 3 March 2015.

[2] The matter was listed for conciliation on 16 April 2015 however it could not take place. Consequently, directions were issued and the matter was listed for hearing.

[3] Ms Putai was directed to file an outline of submissions, any witness statements and other documentary material she wished to rely on by noon, on 25 May 2015.

[4] Ms Putai did not comply with this direction and the matter was listed for a non compliance hearing before Commissioner Bissett on 5 June 2015.

[5] Ms Putai did not attend the non compliance hearing. Regis made an oral application, pursuant to section 399A of the Act, that the matter be dismissed as Ms Putai had failed to comply with the direction of the Fair Work Commission. Commissioner Bissett waived compliance with the Fair Work Commission Rules 2013 and accepted Regis’ oral application.

[6] On 9 June 2015, Ms Putai was sent correspondence informing her of Regis’ section 399A application. Ms Putai was directed to file submissions and other documentary material in respect of Regis’ application by close of business, on 19 June 2015. Ms Putai was advised that if she failed to comply with this direction, her application would be dismissed.

[7] Ms Putai did not file any material with the Commission.

[8] Section 399A of the Act provides as follows:

399A Dismissing applications

(1) The FWC may, subject to subsection (2), dismiss an application for an order under Division 4 if the FWC is satisfied that the applicant has unreasonably:

(a) failed to attend a conference conducted by the FWC, or a hearing held by the FWC, in relation to the application; or

(b) failed to comply with a direction or order of the FWC relating to the application; or

(c) failed to discontinue the application after a settlement agreement has been concluded.

....
(2) The FWC may exercise its power under subsection (1) on application by the employer.

(3) This section does not limit when the FWC may dismiss an application.

[9] Section 593 of the Act provides that the Commission is not required to hold a hearing except as provided by the Act.

[10] As Ms Putai did not file any material in opposition to the application to dismiss, I will determine the application on the papers.

[11] After considering all the material, Ms Putai’s application for remedy from unfair dismissal is dismissed. An order giving effect to this decision will be issued today.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<Price code A, PR568876>