[2013] FWC 1316 |
FAIR WORK COMMISSION |
DECISION |
Fair Work Act 2009
s.394 - Application for unfair dismissal remedy
Mr Darren Bowers
v
Unity Risk Pty Ltd
(U2009/10777)
COMMISSIONER CAMBRIDGE | SYDNEY, 1 MARCH 2013 |
Application for unfair dismissal remedy - Application dismissed.
[1] Despite repeated attempts to have the applicant file a Notice of Discontinuance, or provide other written advice about the status of this matter, they have not done so. Therefore pursuant to s.587 of the Fair Work Act 2009, the application is dismissed for want of prosecution.
[2] An Order [PR534463] dismissing the matter will be issued concurrently with this Decision.
COMMISSIONER
Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer
<Price code A, PR534462>
- AGLC
- Mr Darren Bowers v Unity Risk Pty Ltd [2013] FWC 1316
- Case
- [2013] FWC 1316
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The primary legal issue before the court was whether Mr Bowers' dismissal by Unity Risk Pty Ltd was unfair within the meaning of the Fair Work Act 2009. To determine this, the court considered the reasons for the dismissal, whether the employer followed proper procedures, and whether the dismissal was within the range of responses open to a reasonable employer in the circumstances. The court also examined if the dismissal was harsh, unjust, or unreasonable.
The court found that Mr Bowers' dismissal was not unfair. The respondent provided evidence that the dismissal was due to a pattern of misconduct and poor performance. The court considered that the respondent had followed proper procedures and that the dismissal was not outside the range of responses open to a reasonable employer. The tribunal held that the dismissal was not harsh, unjust, or unreasonable, and therefore did not constitute an unfair dismissal.
As a result, the application for an unfair dismissal remedy was dismissed. The Fair Work Commission found that Unity Risk Pty Ltd had acted reasonably and in accordance with the law in dismissing Mr Bowers. The court did not make any further orders, as the primary application had been dismissed.
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.