Miss Julie-Anne Schinkel v Queensland University of Technology

[2013] FWC 3998

[2013] FWC 3998

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.394 - Application for unfair dismissal remedy

Miss Julie-Anne Schinkel
v
Queensland University of Technology
(U2013/677)

COMMISSIONER BOOTH BRISBANE, 20 JUNE 2013

Termination of employment - extension of time.

[1] This matter involves an application made by Ms Julie-Anne Schinkel under section 394 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act) for an unfair dismissal remedy.

[2] The Respondent is the Queensland University of Technology.

[3] The Applicant identified 12 February 2013 as the date the dismissal took effect and that she was notified of her dismissal on 14 February 2013. The application was lodged on 6 March 2013.

[4] The application was therefore lodged 22 days after the dismissal took effect.

[5] Section 394 (2 ) provides:

s394 Application for unfair dismissal remedy

(1) A person who has been dismissed may apply to FWC for an order under Division 4 granting a remedy.

Note 1: Division 4 sets out when FWC may order a remedy for unfair dismissal.

Note 2: For application fees, see section 395.

Note 3: Part 6-1 may prevent an application being made under this Part in relation to a dismissal if an application or complaint has been made in relation to the dismissal other than under this Part.

(2) The application must be made:

(a) within 21 days after the dismissal took effect; or

(b) within such further period as FWC allows under subsection (3).

(3) FWC may allow a further period for the application to be made by a person under subsection (1) if FWC is satisfied that there are exceptional circumstances, taking into account:

(a) the reason for the delay; and

(b) whether the person first became aware of the dismissal after it had taken effect; and

(c) any action taken by the person to dispute the dismissal; and

(d) prejudice to the employer (including prejudice caused by the delay); and

(e) the merits of the application; and

(f) fairness as between the person and other persons in a similar position

[6] At a directions hearing of the matter, the Respondent indicated that it did not object to an extension of time and further that it had not raised any jurisdictional or other objection to the application in its employer’s response, nor did it raise such an objection in a conference held in the matter.

[7] In these circumstances it was agreed that a decision regarding an extension of time be made on the papers.

[8] I foreshadowed at the directions that an extension would be granted.

[9] For reasons of very short delay of 1 day and that the employer does not oppose an extension, the Fair Work Commission allows a further period of 1 day for the application to be made.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<Price code A, PR538071>