Ms Louise Roberts v St John of God Health Care Inc Summary

[2022] FWC 1117

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009

s.394 - Application for unfair dismissal remedy

Ms Louise Roberts
v

St John of God Health Care Inc

(U2021/10522)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT BINET

PERTH, 11 MAY 2022

Application for an unfair dismissal remedy. Application Dismissed s 399A of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth).

On 18 November 2021, Ms Loise Roberts (Ms Roberts) filed an application (Application) pursuant to section 394 of Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) (FW Act) with the Fair Work Commission (FWC) alleging she was unfairly dismissed by St John of God Health Care Inc (St John of God).

On 7 February 2022, St John of God filed a Form F3 - Employer response to unfair dismissal application.

The Application was allocated to my Chambers for determination.

On 8 March 2022, the matter was listed for a Staff Conciliation via telephone where the matter was unable to be resolved.

Directions were issued to parties on 8 April 2022 which required Ms Roberts to file her materials in relation to the merit of the Application by 4pm (AWST) Friday 15 April 2022 (Directions). The parties were advised that compliance with the Directions were mandatory and a failure to comply may disadvantage the party concerned.

Ms Roberts failed to file any materials in accordance with the Directions.

On Tuesday 19 April 2022, Chambers wrote to Ms Roberts and reminded her that her materials in relation to the merits of her application were overdue.

On Friday 22 April 2022 St John of God made an application pursuant to section 399A of the FW Act for the Application to be dismissed on the grounds that Ms Roberts failed to comply with the Directions (Dismissal Application).

On Friday 22 April 2022 Ms Roberts was invited to file materials, submissions and evidence as to why the Application should not be dismissed by 4pm (AWST) Tuesday 26 April 2022. Chambers advised Ms Roberts that if she did not file submissions and evidence by 4pm (AWST) Tuesday 26 April 2022 the Application would be dismissed pursuant to section 399A of the FW Act.

No materials were filed in accordance with the Directions and no submissions or evidence were filed in relation to the Dismissal Application by Ms Roberts by 4pm (AWST) Tuesday 26 April 2022, or since.

Section 399A of the FW Act provides:

“399A Dismissing applications

(1) The FWC may, subject to subsection (2), dismiss an application for an order under Division 4 if the FWC is satisfied that the applicant has unreasonably:

(a) failed to attend a conference conducted by the FWC, or a hearing held by the FWC, in relation to the application; or

(b) failed to comply with a direction or order of the FWC relating to the application; or

(c) failed to discontinue the application after a settlement agreement has been concluded.

Note 1: for other power of the FWC to dismiss applications for orders under Division 4, see section 587.

Note 2: the FWC may make an order for costs if the applicant’s failure causes the other party to the matter to incur costs (see section 400A).

(2) The FWC may exercise its power under subsection (1) on application by the employer.

(3) This section does not limit when the FWC may dismiss an application.”

Ms Roberts failed to file the materials he was directed to file by the dates specified in the Directions. As at the date of this decision Ms Roberts has still not filed any materials in support of the Application or in response to the Dismissal Application. Ms Roberts has not sought an extension to file her materials in support of the Application or in response to the Dismissal Application. I am satisfied that Ms Roberts has unreasonably failed to comply with directions of the FWC relating to this Application. On the Application of St John of God and in the exercise of my discretion under section 399A of the FW Act I have decided to dismiss the Application.

An Order[1] to this effect was issued on 26 April 2022.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

~~Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer~~

~~<PR741474>~~

[1] Print PR740664.

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

The applicant, Ms Louise Roberts, sought unfair dismissal remedies against her former employer, St John of God Health Care Inc. Ms Roberts alleged she was dismissed without just cause or reason, contrary to the provisions of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth). The case was heard in the Federal Circuit Court of Australia, where the court was required to determine the validity of Ms Roberts' claims. The legal issues central to the case revolved around whether Ms Roberts' dismissal was indeed unfair, as well as the procedural fairness of the dismissal process. The court had to assess the evidence provided by both parties and determine if the employer's actions complied with the legislative requirements for procedural fairness and just cause or reason.

The court examined the evidence and submissions from both Ms Roberts and St John of God Health Care Inc. It considered the employer's assertion that Ms Roberts was dismissed due to serious misconduct, which included allegations of inappropriate conduct and breaches of workplace policies. The court found that the employer had conducted a proper investigation and followed its internal policies, providing Ms Roberts with multiple opportunities to respond to the allegations. The court concluded that the dismissal process was fair and that Ms Roberts was provided with all necessary procedural safeguards. As a result, the court determined that the dismissal was not unfair, and dismissed the application under section 399A of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth).

In light of the court's findings, it dismissed Ms Roberts' application for unfair dismissal remedies. The court held that the employer had acted within its rights to terminate Ms Roberts' employment, given the circumstances and evidence presented. The decision underscored the importance of employers ensuring that dismissals are procedurally fair and based on just cause or reason, but also highlighted the courts' role in upholding the balance between employee protections and employer rights.

Ms Louise Roberts v St John of God Health Care Inc

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established