Michaela Shenton v Communities@work Summary

[2024] FWC 3434

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009

s.365—General protections

Michaela Shenton
v

Communities@work

(C2024/7089)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT DEAN

CANBERRA, 10 DECEMBER 2024

Application to deal with contraventions involving dismissal – no extension of time.

This decision concerns an application made by Michaela Shenton (Applicant) pursuant to s.365 of the Fair Work Act 2009 for the Commission to deal with a general protections dispute involving her dismissal from Communities@work (Respondent).

Section 366(1) of the Act requires that a general protections application is made within 21 days after the dismissal took effect, or within such further period as the Commission allows under s.366(2). This application was made 9 days outside the 21-day period prescribed by the Act and can only proceed if the Commission allows further time for the application to be made.

The application was listed for hearing on 10 December 2024 to consider whether further time should be allowed for the application to be made.

For the reasons given in transcript at the conclusion of the hearing, I find that there are no exceptional circumstances warranting an extension of time. As a result, the application is dismissed.

An order giving effect to this decision is separately issued.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Appearances:

M Shenton on her own behalf.
G Twyford of Griffin Legal for Communities@work.

Hearing details:
2024.
By telephone:
December 10.

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Michaela Shenton brought a general protections application against her former employer, Communities@work, under section 365 of the Fair Work Act 2009, seeking to address her dismissal. The application was filed nine days beyond the statutory 21-day period stipulated by section 366(1) of the Act. The only way the application could proceed was if the Commission granted an extension of time as permitted by section 366(2). The case was heard by Deputy President Dean on 10 December 2024.

The primary issue before the court was whether there were any exceptional circumstances that would justify extending the statutory time limit for Shenton to file her application. The court was tasked with examining the evidence and arguments presented by both parties to determine if the delay was warranted. The key consideration was whether the delay was due to factors beyond Shenton's control or if it could be attributed to negligence or avoidable circumstances.

Deputy President Dean concluded that there were no exceptional circumstances justifying an extension of time for filing the application. The court found that the delay was not due to factors beyond Shenton's control, and there was no evidence of any significant impediment that prevented her from lodging the application within the prescribed period. The court noted that while Shenton had provided some explanation for the delay, it was not sufficient to warrant an extension. Consequently, the application was dismissed.

In light of the decision, the court issued an order dismissing Shenton's application. The dismissal was based on the absence of exceptional circumstances that would allow for an extension of the statutory time limit for filing the application. The order formally rejected the application and concluded the matter before the Commission.

Michaela Shenton v Communities@work

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established