MEREDITH v Martand International Pty Ltd
[2013] FMCA 55
•31 January 2013
FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA
| MEREDITH v MARTAND INTERNATIONAL PTY LTD | [2013] FMCA 55 |
| INDUSTRIAL LAW – Fair Work small claims – no appearance by the respondent – matter proceeded ex parte – applicant employed by respondent as casual retail assistant – applicant entitled to unpaid wages. |
| Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) |
| Applicant: | SUZAN MEREDITH |
| Respondent: | MARTAND INTERNATIONAL PTY LIMITED (ACN 145 535 324) |
| File Number: | SYG 2825 of 2012 |
| Judgment of: | Emmett FM |
| Hearing date: | 31 January 2013 |
| Date of Last Submission: | 31 January 2013 |
| Delivered at: | Sydney |
| Delivered on: | 31 January 2013 |
REPRESENTATION
| The applicant appeared in person and was assisted by Ms A Becroft, solicitor with the office of the Fair Work Ombudsman |
| No appearance by or on behalf of the Respondent |
ORDERS
Leave be granted to the applicant to proceed with the application ex parte.
Judgment for the applicant in the sum of $630.58 (“the Judgment Sum”).
The Judgment Sum is to be paid within 28 days.
| FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT SYDNEY |
SYG 2825 of 2012
| SUZAN MEREDITH |
Applicant
And
| MARTAND INTERNATIONAL PTY LIMITED (ACN 145 535 324) |
Respondent
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
By application filed on 3 December 2012 and “Form 5 Small claim under the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth)” filed on 3 December 2012, the applicant seeks $630.58 from the respondent for unpaid wages from 26 April 2012 to 5 May 2012.
The applicant seeks leave to proceed with her application ex parte. The applicant was assisted at the hearing by Ms Becroft, solicitor from the Fair Work Ombudsman.
In support of the application to proceed ex parte, Ms Becroft read the affidavit of service of Jelena Pisaturo, affirmed 29 January 2013. I note that the affidavit of service states that the application and the Form 5, filed on 3 December 2012, were served on the respondent at the respondent’s registered address on 13 December 2012, and the sole director of the respondent’s residential address on 21 December 2012.
In light of the evidence before me, I am satisfied that the respondent has been duly served according to law and has had a reasonable time in which to participate in the proceeding before this Court. There has been no communication received by this Court from the respondent either seeking an adjournment of today’s hearing or for any other reason. There has been no document filed by the respondent in response to the application filed, and neither has the applicant received any communication from the respondent.
In the circumstances, I am satisfied that it is appropriate that leave be granted to the applicant to proceed ex parte on her application today.
Ms Becroft read the affidavit of the applicant, affirmed 23 January 2013, in which the applicant claimed to have been employed as a sales/administrative assistant on a casual basis between 25 July 2011 and 5 May 2012.
The applicant claimed that from the period 26 April 2012 to 5 May 2012 she was not paid any wages and that her employer at that time was the respondent.
An extract from the Australian Business Register was tendered by the applicant and marked Exhibit 1A which showed that the respondent owned the business name Kudos Living and traded under that name. Based on that evidence, I accept that the respondent traded as Kudos Living. The applicant annexed copies of her own bank statements showing payment of wages by Kudos Living on 5 April 2012, 18 April 2012 and 30 April 2012.
I accept the applicant’s evidence that she was employed on a casual basis working approximately 14 hours per week at an agreed hourly rate of $20.44 per hour for weekdays and an additional $13.80 per hour when she worked more than four hours on Saturdays.
I accept the applicant’s oral evidence that on 7 May 2012 her employment was terminated.
I further accept the applicant’s evidence that she was not paid any wages for the period 26 April 2012 to 5 May 2012 during which time she worked a total of 29.5 hours. I accept that ten of the hours worked was in respect of 5 hours work performed on Saturday 28 April 2012 and 5 hours worked performed on Saturday 5 May 2012.
In the circumstances, I am satisfied that the respondent owes the applicant a total of $630.58 for unpaid wages between 26 April 2012 and 5 May 2012 and that judgment should be entered for the applicant in that amount.
I certify that the preceding twelve (12) paragraphs are a true copy of the reasons for judgment of Emmett FM
Date: 31 January 2013
0
0
1