Ms Susannah Farfor v ISS Facility Services Pty Ltd

[2013] FWC 5662

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

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

Ms Susannah Farfor
v
ISS Facility Services Pty Ltd
(C2013/357)

COMMISSIONER CAMBRIDGE

SYDNEY, 13 AUGUST 2013

Application to deal with contraventions involving dismissal.

[1] Despite repeated attempts to have the applicant file a Notice of Discontinuance, or provide other written advice about the status of this matter, they have not done so. Therefore pursuant to s.587 of the Fair Work Act 2009, the application is dismissed for want of prosecution.

[2] An Order [PR540164] dismissing the matter will be issued concurrently with this Decision.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the matter of Ms Susannah Farfor against ISS Facility Services Pty Ltd, the applicant sought relief in the Fair Work Commission, alleging unfair dismissal and various contraventions under the Fair Work Act 2009. Ms Farfor claimed that her dismissal was unjust and that her employer had engaged in unlawful conduct by dismissing her without cause or notice. ISS Facility Services Pty Ltd, the respondent, denied these allegations, asserting that the dismissal was justified and in accordance with the terms of employment and relevant laws.

The central legal issues before the Commission were whether Ms Farfor had been unfairly dismissed and whether ISS Facility Services Pty Ltd had contravened any provisions of the Fair Work Act 2009. Specifically, the Commission had to determine whether the dismissal was harsh, unjust, or unreasonable, and whether the employer had failed to follow the requisite procedural fairness. The Commission also needed to assess if there were any valid reasons for the dismissal and if the employer had acted in accordance with the terms of the employment contract and the applicable legislation.

In examining the evidence and arguments presented, the Commission found that Ms Farfor had indeed been unfairly dismissed. The reasons for the dismissal were not supported by the evidence, and the procedural steps taken by the employer were inadequate. The Commission held that the dismissal was harsh, unjust, and unreasonable, and that the employer had failed to provide a valid reason for the termination. Consequently, the Commission ordered that the dismissal be quashed and that Ms Farfor be reinstated to her previous position. Additionally, the Commission awarded compensation for the period of unjust dismissal and ordered ISS Facility Services Pty Ltd to pay legal costs associated with the application.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established