Moore v TPI Holdings Pty Ltd

Case

[2012] FMCA 572

28 June 2012


FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA

MOORE v TPI HOLDINGS PTY LTD [2012] FMCA 572
INDUSTRIAL LAW – Fair Work small claims – no appearance by the applicant or the respondent – Fair Work Ombudsman solicitor, Ms Kovalsky, appeared amicus curiae – respondent in liquidation – application dismissed.
Fair Work Act2009 (Cth)
Applicant: JOY ELIZABETH MOORE
Respondent: TPI HOLDINGS PTY LTD
File Number: SYG 504 of 2012
Judgment of: Emmett FM
Hearing date: 28 June 2012
Date of Last Submission: 28 June 2012
Delivered at: Sydney
Delivered on: 28 June 2012

REPRESENTATION

No appearance by the applicant or the respondent.

ORDERS

  1. The proceeding before this Court, commenced by way of application filed on 6 March 2012, is dismissed.

FEDERAL MAGISTRATES
COURT OF AUSTRALIA
AT SYDNEY

SYG 504 of 2012

JOY ELIZABETH MOORE

Applicant

And

TPI HOLDINGS PTY LTD

Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

  1. On 6 March 2012, the applicant filed an application and a “Form 5 Small Claim under the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth)” seeking payment from the respondent of unpaid wages, unpaid annual leave, payment in lieu of notice and other amounts.

  2. The applicant appeared before the Court at a directions hearing on 29 March 2012. On that occasion, the applicant confirmed to the Court that the respondent had not at that stage been served. Accordingly, the applicant was directed to serve upon the respondent copies of the initiating application, the Form 5 and the orders made by the Court on 29 March 2012.

  3. The applicant was also directed to file and serve an affidavit of service, and the Court noted that the applicant had discontinued her claim in respect of all sums sought, but for the claim for unpaid wages, unpaid annual leave and superannuation. The matter was stood over by me for hearing on 28 May 2012.

  4. On 5 April 2012, the applicant filed an affidavit of service upon someone called Mr Moss. I make no determination as to whether or not that affidavit of service provides evidence of service in accordance with the rules of the Court, because on 28 May 2012 the Court was informed that the respondent was in liquidation. Upon that information, the Court gave the applicant a further opportunity to seek advice. The applicant informed the Court that she intended to file a Notice of Discontinuance prior to the next Court event, and the matter was stood over for further mention today.

  5. It is now 3.35pm. The matter has been called outside on several occasions. There has been no appearance by the applicant. However, the solicitor for the Fair Work Ombudsman, Ms Kovalsky, appearing amicus curiae, informed the Court that the respondent is under administration. Ms Kovalsky tendered an ASIC search confirming that a liquidator had been appointed to the respondent on 23 April 2012.

  6. In the circumstances, the proceeding before this Court commenced by way of application, filed on 6 March 2012, should be dismissed.

I certify that the preceding six (6) paragraphs are a true copy of the reasons for judgment of Emmett FM

Date:  5 July 2012

Actions
Download as PDF Download as Word Document


Cases Citing This Decision

0

Cases Cited

0

Statutory Material Cited

1