Mr Maiko Connop v Telstra Corporation Limited

[2022] FWC 1643

[2022] FWC 1643

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009

s.394 - Application for unfair dismissal remedy

Mr Maiko Connop
v

Telstra Corporation Limited

(U2022/4382)

COMMISSIONER RIORDAN SYDNEY, 28 JUNE 2022

Application for an unfair dismissal remedy

1. Mr Maiko Connop (the Applicant) lodged an unfair dismissal application (the Application) pursuant to s.394 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act) on 14 April 2022 claiming that he was unfairly dismissed by Telstra Corporation Limited (the Respondent) on 24 March 2022.

1. The matter was allocated to my Chambers on 19 May 2022. A notice of listing was issued on 19 May 2022, for a Conciliation Conference to be held on 30 May 2022.

1. The Applicant is represented by Mr O. El Hissi from NOH Legal. However, at the Conciliation Conference before me, Ms N. El Hissi represented the Applicant. Mr M. Tamvakologos Partner, Seyfarth Shaw appeared on behalf of the Respondent.

1. On 30 May 2022, following the unsuccessful Conciliation Conference before me, a Notice of Listing and Directions for the Hearing on 25 July 2022 were issued to the parties. Those directions read as follows:

“DIRECTIONS

1. The Applicant (Mr Maiko Connop) is directed to file with the Fair Work Commission, and serve on the Respondent, an outline of submissions, witness statements and other documentary material the Applicant intends to rely on in support of their application in this matter by no later than 4.00pm on 21 June 2022.

2. The Respondent (Telstra Corporation Limited) is directed to file with the Fair Work Commission, and serve on the Applicant, an outline of submissions, witness statements and other documentary material the Respondent intends to rely on in opposition to the application in this matter by no later than 4.00pm on 12 July 2022.

3. The Applicant (Mr Maiko Connop) is directed to file with the Fair Work Commission, and serve on the Respondent, any witness statements and other documentary material in reply to the Respondent's witness statements and documents by no later than 4.00pm on 19 July 2022.”

1. On 24 June 2022, my Chambers wrote to the Applicant and his Representative coping to the Respondent the below email enquiry:  

“Dear Mr Cannop,

Reference is made to the above matter and the Notice of Listing and Directions (attached) which issued to the parties on 30 May 2022.

Your materials were due to be filed on 21 June 2022 and to date it does not appear these materials have been received.

Please provide a response by 9am Monday, 27 June 2022, whether you intend to file these materials or now seek to withdraw your application.

In the event of no response or explanation from you regarding the delay in filing, your application may be dismissed.”

(my emphasis)

1. To date, the Applicant or his Representative has not provided any further response, either by email or by way of telephone.

1. Section 587(1) of the Act provides:

“587 Dismissing applications

(1) Without limiting when the FWC may dismiss an application, the FWC may dismiss an application if:

(a) the application is not made in accordance with this Act; or
(b) the application is frivolous or vexatious; or
(c) the application has no reasonable prospects of success.

(2) Despite paragraphs (1)(b) and (c), FWC must not dismiss an application under section 365 or 773 on the ground that the application:

(a) is frivolous or vexatious; or
(b) has no reasonable prospects of success.

(3) FWC may dismiss an application:

(a) on its own initiative; or
(b) on application.”

1. In the circumstances, I have decided to dismiss the application for want of prosecution.

1. I so Order.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<PR743080>