| [2022] FWC 735 |
| FAIR WORK COMMISSION |
| DECISION |
Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement
NXGEN Cabling Pty Ltd
(AG2022/632)
| COMMISSIONER P RYAN | SYDNEY, 1 APRIL 2022 |
Application for approval of a single-enterprise agreement – Application dismissed for want of prosecution
Background
NXGEN Cabling Pty Ltd (Applicant) filed an application for approval of a single-enterprise agreement pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) (FW Act) (Application)
On 21 March 2022, my chambers sent correspondence to the Applicant seeking responses and/or undertakings in relation to various issues of concern that were identified with Application. That correspondence requested a response by 4:00pm on 23 March 2022. The Applicant did not respond.
On 24 March 2022, my chambers sent correspondence to the Applicant referring to the correspondence set out at [3] above and sought responses and/or undertakings in relation to the various issues of concern that were identified with Application, as well as an explanation for the lack of a response to the earlier correspondence. This correspondence requested a response by 4:00pm on 25 March 2022. The Applicant did not respond.
On 29 March 2022, my chambers sent correspondence to the Applicant referring to the correspondence set out at [3] and [4] above and advised that if “a response is not received by 4:00pm on Thursday 31 March 2022, the Application may be dismissed pursuant to s587 of the Fair Work Act 2009 without further notice.” (Emphasis in original)
The Applicant did not respond.
I note each item of correspondence referred to above was copied to the bargaining representatives notified to the Commission as part of the Application.
Legislative Provisions
Section 587 of the FW Act provides as follows:
“587 Dismissing applications
(1) Without limiting when the FWC may dismiss an application, the FWC may dismiss an application if:
(a) the application is not made in accordance with this Act; or
(b) the application is frivolous or vexatious; or
(c) the application has no reasonable prospects of success.
Note: For another power of the FWC to dismiss an application for a remedy for unfair dismissal made under Division 5 of Part 3 2, see section 399A.
(2) Despite paragraphs (1)(b) and (c), the FWC must not dismiss an application under section 365 or 773 on the ground that the application:
(a) is frivolous or vexatious; or
(b) has no reasonable prospects of success.
(3) The FWC may dismiss an application:
(a) on its own initiative; or
(b) on application.”
The words, “[w]ithout limiting when FWC may dismiss an application” at the commencement of s.587(1) of the FW Act establish that the jurisdiction of the Commission to dismiss an application is not limited to the circumstances set out in s.587(1)(a), (b) and (c).
Consideration
Taking into consideration the Applicant’s failure to respond to correspondence from the Commission on three occasions, I have decided to dismiss the Application for want of prosecution pursuant to s.587(3)(a) of the FW Act.
For completeness, at the time of issuing this decision, the Applicant has not made any contact with the Commission.
Disposition
The Application is dismissed. An order to that effect will issue with this decision.
COMMISSIONER
Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer
<PR739936>
- AGLC
- NXGEN Cabling Pty Ltd [2022] FWC 735
- Case
- [2022] FWC 735
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The Applicant's failure to respond to multiple communications from the Commission raised concerns about the viability of the application. The Commission considered the Applicant's disregard for its correspondence and the statutory provisions that empower it to dismiss applications that are not pursued with due diligence. The Commission determined that the application was not being actively pursued by the Applicant, and thus, the application was dismissed for want of prosecution. The Commission emphasised that its jurisdiction to dismiss an application is not limited to the circumstances specified in s.587(1) of the Fair Work Act, and it could dismiss an application on its own initiative.
The Fair Work Commission dismissed the application for approval of a single enterprise agreement due to the Applicant's failure to respond to multiple communications from the Commission. The Commission found that the application had been neglected and dismissed it for want of prosecution under s.587(3)(a) of the Fair Work Act. An order to that effect will issue with this decision.
Orders
Orders of the court
Full text does not contain this section.
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.