Navdeep Kaur Puri v South West Training Services Pty Ltd T/A Equip Early Learning Centre

[2025] FWC 245

[2025] FWC 245

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009

s.365—General protections

Navdeep Kaur Puri
v

South West Training Services Pty Ltd T/A Equip Early Learning Centre

(C2024/8299)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT MASSON MELBOURNE, 28 JANUARY 2025

Application to deal with contraventions involving dismissal - jurisdictional objection - whether application made outside 21-day limit – whether extension of time required - jurisdictional objection rejected - found that application made within 21-day limit– in the alternative - found that exceptional circumstances present – extension of time granted.  

1. This decision concerns an application made by Mrs Navdeep Kaur Puri (the Applicant) in which she asserts that the termination of her employment by South West Training Services Pty Ltd T/A Equip Early Learning Centre (the Respondent) contravened her workplace rights. The Applicant alleges she was dismissed on 29 October 2024. The general protections application was lodged by the Applicant on 19 November 2024. The Respondent raised a jurisdictional objection to the application on the grounds that it was lodged outside the 21-day statutory time limit, claiming that the dismissal took effect on 23 October 2024.

1. Section 366(1) of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) (the Act) states that an application for a remedy under s 365 of the Act must be made ‘within 21 days after the dismissal took effect’, or within such further period as the Fair Work Commission (the Commission) allows pursuant to s 366(2) of the Act. The contest over the termination date in the present matter must be resolved as the period of 21 days will have ended at midnight on the 19 November 2024 if it is established that the effective date of dismissal was 29 October 2024. If, however, it is established that the effective date of dismissal was 23 October 2024, as argued by the Respondent, then the 21 days will have ended at midnight on 13 November 2024.

1. Following allocation of the matter to my Chambers, Directions were issued on 23 December 2024 for the filing of material in relation to the jurisdictional objection. Both parties filed material in accordance with the Directions. At the hearing held on 28 January 2024, Mr Morgan Cumming, who was granted to permission to appear on behalf of the Applicant pursuant to s 596(2) of the Act, called the Applicant to give evidence. Ms Jennifer Anderson of HR Adviser Australia was granted permission to appear on behalf of the Respondent pursuant to s 596(2) of the Act.

1. For reasons given on transcript in the hearing on 28 January 2024, I have found that the Applicant’s dismissal took effect on 30 October 2024, meaning that her general protections application was filed within the statutory 21-day time period. In the alternative, I have found that if I were wrong in my conclusion as to the effective date of dismissal and that it took effect on 23 October 2024, I would nonetheless grant an extension of time for the filing of the Applicant’s general protections application.

1. It is also clear that the Applicant alleges her dismissal contravened Part 3-1 of the Act. The requirements of s 365 have been met. The Respondent’s jurisdictional objection is dismissed. The application will now proceed to a conciliation conference which will be listed shortly.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Appearances:
Morgan Cumming for the Applicant.

Jennifer Anderson for the Respondent.

Hearing details:

2025.
Melbourne:

28 January

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<PR783709>