Mr Tristan Place v Ignition Immersive Pty Ltd

Case

[2024] FWC 26

4 JANUARY 2024


[2024] FWC 26

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009

s.394 - Application for unfair dismissal remedy

Mr Tristan Place
v

Ignition Immersive Pty Ltd

(U2023/8974)

COMMISSIONER JOHNS

MELBOURNE, 4 JANUARY 2024

Application for an unfair dismissal remedy

  1. On 18 September 2023, Mr Tristan Place (Applicant) made an application to the Fair Work Commission (Commission) pursuant to section 394 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) (FW Act) for a remedy in respect of his dismissal by Ignition Immersive Pty Ltd (Employer/Respondent).

  1. The Applicant contended that he was forced to resign because of a course of conduct by the Respondent concerning the non-payment or delayed payment of wages, entitlements, superannuation and commissions.

  1. On 2 October 2023, the Employer filed a response to the unfair dismissal application.

  1. Attempts at conciliation were attempted, but the matter remained unresolved.

  1. Consequently, the matter was programmed and listed for a jurisdictional hearing (the Respondent contending that the Applicant had not been dismissed) on Friday, 5 January 2024.

  1. In response to the Directions the parties filed the following materials:

Exhibit Document title Date
1 Form F2 18-09-2023
1.1 Attachment Marked A undated
2 Form F3 02-10-2023
2.1 Commission Agreement - Tristan Place 22-04-2021
2.2 Small Business Fair Dismissal Code
Checklist
02-10-2023
3 Respondent's outline of arguments: Objections 29-11-2023
4 Email from the Applicant attaching submissions 13-12-2023
4.1 Applicant's outline of arguments: Objections 13-12-2023
4.2 Applicant's outline of arguments: Merits 13-12-2023
4.3 Applicant's statement of evidence 13-12-2023
4.4 Applicant's document list various
4.5 Document titled "Working notes on
Constructive Dismissal Argument"
undated
4.6 Document titled "Respondent objection statements and rebuttal notes" undated
  1. On 2 January 2024, in the course of filing its materials, the Respondent made a number of concessions and withdrew its jurisdictional objection.

  1. On the same day, I sought to clarify the Respondent’s position and proposed that the matter could be resolved by way of consent orders.  On 4 January 2024 the parties agreed.

  1. Consequently, having regard to the materials submitted by the parties, the concessions made by the Respondent and the consent orders agreed to, I am satisfied that:

a)The Applicant is a person protected from unfair dismissal,

b)The dismissal was not consistent with the Small Business Fair Dismissal Code,

c)The dismissal was not a case of genuine redundancy,

d)The Applicant was dismissed within the meaning of section 386(1)(b) of the FW Act, in that he was forced to resign because of a course of conduct engaged in by the Respondent,

e)There was no valid reason for the dismissal related to the Applicant’s capacity or conduct,

f)The dismissal of the Applicant was harsh and unreasonable,

g)The dismissal of the Applicant was, therefore, unfair,

h)Reinstatement would be inappropriate,

  1. Compensation is appropriate, and

j)By consent of the parties, compensation in the amount of one month’s salary: $11,538.46 payable within 21 days.

  1. An order [PR769955] will be issued with this decision.


COMMISSIONER

Hearing details:

On the papers.

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<PR769961>

Actions
Download as PDF Download as Word Document


Cases Citing This Decision

0

Cases Cited

0

Statutory Material Cited

0