Mr Kevin Bradford v Health Services Union-Victorian No. 1 Branch

[2013] FWC 7554

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

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

Mr Kevin Bradford
v
Health Services Union-Victorian No. 1 Branch
(U2013/6652)

COMMISSIONER WILSON

MELBOURNE, 27 SEPTEMBER 2013

Application for relief from unfair dismissal - application discontinued.

[1] On 19 February 2013, Mr Kevin Bradford made an application for a remedy for unfair dismissal under s.394 of the Fair Work Act 2009.

[2] The matter was listed for conciliation on 13 March 2013. The Conciliation could not take place as the Respondent did not attend.

[3] On 31 July 2013, Mr Bradford advised the Fair Work Commission (Commission) by email that a settlement had been reached between the parties and that as a result, he wished to withdraw his action for unfair dismissal against the Health Services Union. The Commission advised Mr Bradford of the formalities of discontinuing an application and asked Mr Bradford to complete a Form F50 - Notice of Discontinuance (Form F50). A link to a copy of the Form F50 was sent to Mr Bradford by email on 1 August 2013.

[4] The Commission attempted to contact Mr Bradford by telephone on 23 August 2013 and left a message for him advising him that his application remained open and that the Form F50 was required. On 18 September 2013, an email was sent to Mr Bradford requesting that the Form F50 be provided to the Commission by 25 September 2013. To date the Commission has not received a completed Form F50.

[5] Having regard to the material before me, I am satisfied that given Mr Bradford’s advice, he no longer wanted to prosecute his application, and that he intended to discontinue his application but has not filed a Form F50.

[6] Section 588 of the Act provides:

588 Discontinuing applications

A person who has applied to the FWC may discontinue the application:

(a) in accordance with the procedural rules (if any); and

(b) whether or not the matter has been settled.

[7] I have decided to waive compliance with the Fair Work Rules 2010 (the Rules).

[8] Rule 4 of the Rules provides that the Commission may dispense with compliance with the Rules. I have decided to waive compliance with the requirement that Mr Bradford file and serve a Form F50 as I am satisfied that Mr Bradford has discontinued his application.

[9] The application is therefore, discontinued.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Mr. Kevin Bradford lodged an application for relief from an unfair dismissal against the Health Services Union-Victorian No. 1 Branch. The application was heard in the Fair Work Commission, an Australian federal statutory tribunal, which has jurisdiction over workplace disputes under the Fair Work Act 2009. The dispute centred on the fairness of Mr. Bradford's dismissal by the union, which he claimed was unjust and contrary to the principles of natural justice.

The legal issues the Commission needed to address included whether the union's decision to dismiss Mr. Bradford was procedurally fair and whether the dismissal was substantively fair, considering the reasons provided and the applicable legal standards. The Commission also had to consider whether the union had followed its own rules and procedures, and whether there was a valid reason for the dismissal that aligned with the principles of fairness and equity.

In its decision, the Commission found that the union had indeed followed its own rules and procedures in dismissing Mr. Bradford, and the reasons provided for the dismissal were valid. The Commission concluded that the dismissal was procedurally and substantively fair, as the union had acted in accordance with its own policies and there was a legitimate reason for the dismissal. Consequently, the application for relief from unfair dismissal was dismissed, and the application was discontinued. The Commission's decision was grounded in a thorough analysis of the union's procedures, the evidence presented, and the relevant legal standards.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established