Patrick Warren v Barwon Health Summary

[2025] FWC 2306

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009

s.394—Unfair dismissal

Patrick Warren
v

Barwon Health

(U2025/10924)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT O’NEILL

MELBOURNE, 12 AUGUST 2025

Application for an unfair dismissal remedy – unpaid application fee – application is not made in accordance with this Act – application dismissed – s.587(1)(a).

On 30 June 2025 Mr Patrick Warren made an unfair dismissal application under s.394 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth).

For the reasons that follow I am satisfied that Mr Warren’s application has not been made in accordance with the Act and that it is appropriate to dismiss the application.

Mr Warren’s application was incomplete because he did not pay the required fee[1] or file a completed request to waive the fee.

Commission staff attempted to contact Mr Warren on 9 and 24 July 2025, by email. On 1 August 2025, the Commission called Mr Warren’s representative and left a voicemail with a final reminder. Mr Warren’s representative was advised that if no response was received, his application may be dismissed under s.587(1)(a) of the Act because it has not been made in accordance with the Act. My Chambers also attempted to call the Applicant on 5 August 2025. No response has been received, the fee has not been paid, and no waiver request has been received.

Mr Warren has been given ample opportunity to rectify the deficiency in the application. He has not responded to multiple enquiries and warnings that his application may be dismissed. I am satisfied that Mr Warren’s application should be dismissed. I make the following order:

1. The application under s.394 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) made by Mr Patrick Warren on 30 June 2025 is dismissed.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

[1] Section 395 of the Act.

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the Fair Work Commission, Mr. Patrick Warren brought an application against Barwon Health for unfair dismissal under section 394 of the Fair Work Act 2009. The application was lodged on 30 June 2025. Deputy President O’Neill was tasked with determining whether the application should proceed and if any remedy was warranted. The primary legal issue before the court was whether Mr. Warren's application complied with the statutory requirements, particularly regarding the payment of the application fee or a waiver request.

The court examined whether Mr. Warren's application met the necessary procedural requirements as stipulated in the Fair Work Act 2009. Section 395 of the Act mandates that an application fee be paid or a request to waive the fee be submitted. The court found that Mr. Warren's application was deficient as neither the fee was paid nor a waiver request was filed. Despite multiple attempts by the Commission staff to contact Mr. Warren and his representative, including emails and phone calls, no response was received. The final reminder on 1 August 2025 warned that failure to comply would result in the dismissal of the application under section 587(1)(a) of the Act.

Given the repeated opportunities provided to Mr. Warren to rectify the deficiency and his failure to respond, Deputy President O’Neill determined that the application did not comply with the requirements of the Act. Consequently, the court dismissed Mr. Warren's application for unfair dismissal. The order issued reflects the dismissal of the application made by Mr. Patrick Warren on 30 June 2025, concluding that it was not made in accordance with the Act.

Patrick Warren v Barwon Health

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established