Ms Margaret Ioannidis v Lasermail Pty Ltd

[2012] FWA 9001

[2012] FWA 9001

FAIR WORK AUSTRALIA

DECISION

AND

REASONS FOR DECISION

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

Ms Margaret Ioannidis
v
Lasermail Pty Ltd
(U2012/12374)

COMMISSIONER CLOGHAN PERTH, 22 OCTOBER 2012

Unfair dismissal.

[1] On 15 August 2012, Ms Margaret Ioannidis (“the Applicant”) made application to Fair Work Australia (FWA) seeking a remedy for alleged unfair dismissal from her former employer, Lasermail Pty Ltd (“the Employer”).

[2] Ms Ioannidis’ employment was terminated with immediate effect on 17 April 2012.

[3] The application was made pursuant to s.394 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (“the FW Act”).

[4] For the Tribunal to have jurisdiction to hear and determine the matter, it is necessary for the application to be made within 14 days after the dismissal took effect (see paragraph 394(2) of the FW Act).

[5] It is self evident that Ms Ioannidis has not made the application within 14 days after the dismissal took effect. However, the Tribunal can allow for a further period for the application to be made (that is, 15 August 2012), if it is satisfied that there are exceptional circumstances, taking into account:

(a) the reason for the delay; and

(b) whether the person first became aware of the dismissal after it had taken effect; and

(c) any action taken by the person to dispute the dismissal; and

(d) prejudice to the employer (including prejudice caused by the delay); and

(e) the merits of the application; and

(f) fairness as between the person and other persons in a similar position.

[6] On 6 September 2012, by way of a Statement and Directions, I invited the Applicant to make submissions to satisfy the Tribunal that exceptional circumstances existed to allow the application to be made on 15 August 2012. The Employer was given the opportunity to respond to those submissions. Ms Ioannidis was, in turn, given the opportunity to respond to the Employer’s submission.

[7] The Applicant did not make any submission to the Tribunal.

[8] In the absence of any submission by the Applicant or advice to the Tribunal why a submission could not be made, I have considered the application on the basis of the documentary material already provided by Ms Ioannidis. Having considered this material, I am not satisfied that exceptional circumstances existed to allow the application to be made approximately 15 weeks after the standard timeline of 14 days.

[9] The application will be dismissed. An Order to this effect is issued jointly with this Decision and Reasons for Decision.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<Price code A, PR530478>