Mia Medic v Skyfield Homes Pty Ltd

Case [2023] FWC 1091


[2023] FWC 1091

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009

s.394—Unfair dismissal

Mia Medic
v

Skyfield Homes Pty Ltd

(U2023/3118)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT O’NEILL

MELBOURNE, 9 MAY 2023

Application for an unfair dismissal remedy

  1. On 11 April 2023 Ms Mia Medic made an application to the Fair Work Commission for a remedy for unfair dismissal pursuant to s.394 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (FW Act).

  1. The application was incomplete in that Ms Medic did not pay the required fee or file a completed waiver form.

  1. On 18 April 2023 the Commission emailed correspondence to Ms Medic’s nominated email address advising that her application required payment of the filing fee or a completed waiver form if she wished to proceed with the application. That correspondence also warned that if payment is not made or a waiver form is not received within 7 calendar days the application may be dismissed.

  1. On 26 April 2023 the Commission emailed correspondence to Ms Medic’s nominated email address reminding that her application required payment of the filing fee or a completed waiver form if she wished to proceed with the application. That correspondence also warned that if payment is not made or a waiver form is not received, the application may be dismissed.

  1. An attempt to contact Ms Medic on her nominated telephone number was made by the Commission on 4 May 2023 to obtain payment or a completed waiver form. The call was not answered. A voicemail message was left advising Ms Medic that payment of the required fee was still outstanding.

  1. A final attempt to contact Ms Medic on their nominated telephone number was made by the Commission on 8 May 2023 to obtain payment or a completed waiver form. The call was not answered.

  1. To date there has been no response from Ms Medic, the required fee has not been paid and a completed waiver form has not been received.

  1. Section 395 of the FW Act, which deals with application fees, provides as follows:

395 Application fees

(1) An application to the FWC under this Division must be accompanied by any fee prescribed by the regulations.

(2) The regulations may prescribe:

(a) a fee for making an application to the FWC under this Division; and

(b) a method for indexing the fee; and

(c) the circumstances in which all or part of the fee may be waived or refunded.

  1. Section 587(1) of the FW Act provides as follows:

587 Dismissing applications

(1) Without limiting when the FWC may dismiss an application, the FWC may dismiss an application if:

(a) the application is not made in accordance with this Act; or

(b) the application is frivolous or vexatious; or

(c) the application has no reasonable prospect of success.

  1. I am satisfied that, as the application was not accompanied by the fee prescribed by the FW Act, the application was not made in accordance with the FW Act. As such, the application is dismissed pursuant to s.587(1)(a) of the FW Act.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<PR761726>

Details
AGLC
Mia Medic v Skyfield Homes Pty Ltd [2023] FWC 1091
Case
[2023] FWC 1091
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Mia Medic applied to the Fair Work Commission for a remedy for unfair dismissal under s.394 of the Fair Work Act 2009. The application was incomplete as Medic did not pay the required fee or file a completed waiver form. The Commission made several attempts to contact Medic to obtain the outstanding fee or waiver form, but no response was received. The Commission dismissed the application as it was not made in accordance with the FW Act, pursuant to s.587(1)(a) of the FW Act.

The legal issues in this case were whether the application complied with the FW Act and whether the application could be dismissed for non-compliance. The Court found that the application was not accompanied by the fee prescribed by the FW Act and therefore was not made in accordance with the Act.

The Fair Work Commission found that the application did not comply with the FW Act as it was not accompanied by the required fee or a completed waiver form. The Commission made several attempts to contact Medic to obtain the outstanding fee or waiver form, but no response was received. The Commission dismissed the application pursuant to s.587(1)(a) of the FW Act as it was not made in accordance with the Act.

The Fair Work Commission dismissed Mia Medic's application for an unfair dismissal remedy as it was not made in accordance with the FW Act.

Orders

Orders of the court

Full text does not contain this section.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.