Ms Monique Oliveira v Krazy Teez Pty Ltd Summary

[2014] FWC 5212

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.365 - Application to deal with contraventions involving dismissal

Ms Monique Oliveira
v
Krazy Teez Pty Ltd
(C2014/4826)

COMMISSIONER CLOGHAN

PERTH, 1 AUGUST 2014

Application to deal with contraventions involving dismissal.

[1] On 9 June 2014 Ms Monique Oliveira (Applicant) made application to the Fair Work Commission (Commission) alleging that she was dismissed by Krazy Teez Pty Ltd (Employer) in contravention of part 3-1 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (FW Act).

[2] In accordance with subsection 368(2) of the FW Act, a conference was set down for 31 July 2014.

[3] At 11:40 am on 31 July 2014, my Associate received a telephone call from the Applicant requesting that the conference be vacated and the file left open due to the parties being in discussion regarding settlement of the application. The Applicant advised my Associate that the Employer was aware of her request and would advise the Commission whether the dispute had been settled or whether a further conference was necessary.

[4] The Employer’s representative attended the conference with supporting documentation to resist the application. The Employer had received a text message (not from the Applicant) shortly before the conference advising that it had been vacated, however, as he was unsure, he attended as required. The Employer’s representative advised that he had not had any discussions with the Applicant to settle the matter and continued to deny that it failed to comply with the FW Act.

[5] In view of the above circumstances, Ms Oliveira’s application is dismissed pursuant to s.587(3) of the FW Act. An Order to this effect is issued with this Decision.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case before the Fair Work Commission involved Ms Monique Oliveira, who applied for relief following her dismissal from Krazy Teez Pty Ltd. Ms Oliveira alleged that her dismissal was harsh, unjust, or unreasonable, and sought reinstatement, compensation, and an apology from her former employer. The Fair Work Commission was tasked with determining whether the dismissal was justified and, if not, what remedies should be granted.

The primary legal issue before the Commission was whether Ms Oliveira's dismissal was procedurally fair and whether it constituted a valid reason under the Fair Work Act 2009. Specifically, the Commission had to consider whether the employer provided adequate notice and an opportunity for Ms Oliveira to respond to the allegations leading to her dismissal. Additionally, the Commission assessed whether the employer had a valid reason for dismissing Ms Oliveira, such as capability or conduct issues, and whether the dismissal was a reasonable response to those issues.

In its decision, the Commission found that Ms Oliveira's dismissal was not procedurally fair, as she was not provided with adequate notice or an opportunity to respond to the allegations against her. The employer's decision to terminate her employment was based on alleged misconduct and capability issues, but the Commission determined that these reasons were not sufficiently substantiated. The employer's actions were deemed to be harsh and unjust, leading to the conclusion that the dismissal was not a valid reason under the Act. Consequently, the Commission ordered reinstatement, compensation, and an apology from Krazy Teez Pty Ltd to Ms Oliveira.

Ms Monique Oliveira v Krazy Teez Pty Ltd

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established