Peter Thiel v Roladuct Spiral Tubing Pty Ltd

[2017] FWC 908

[2017] FWC 908

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.394—Unfair dismissal

Peter Thiel
v
Roladuct Spiral Tubing Pty Ltd
(U2017/610)

SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT O’CALLAGHAN ADELAIDE, 14 FEBRUARY 2017

Application for an unfair dismissal remedy - filing fee not paid.

[1] On 20 January 2017, Mr Peter Thiel made an application for remedy for unfair dismissal under s.394 of the Fair Work Act 2009.

[2] Mr Thiel did not pay the required fee. Mr Thiel requested the Fair Work Commission (Commission) to contact his daughter for payment of the fee.

[3] On 20 January 2017, the Commission attempted to contact Mr Thiel’s daughter by telephone but was unsuccessful.

[4] On 23 January 2017, Mr Thiel was advised by letter that his application required payment of the filing fee or a completed waiver form if he wished to proceed with his application.

[5] Section 395, which deals with application fees, provides:

       “395 Application fees

               (1) An application to the FWC under this Division must be accompanied by any fee prescribed by the regulations.

               (2) The regulations may prescribe:

              (a) a fee for making an application to the FWC under this Division; and

              (b) a method for indexing the fee; and

              (c) the circumstances in which all or part of the fee may be waived or refunded.”

[6] On 1 February 2017, the Commission attempted to contact Mr Thiel by telephone in relation to the correspondence dated on 23 January 2017 but was unsuccessful.

[7] On 9 February 2017, the Commission attempted to contact Mr Thiel and his daughter by telephone but was unsuccessful. An email was sent to Mr Thiel’s daughter requesting she contact the Commission.

[8] No response was received from Mr Thiel or his daughter and payment of the required fee has not been made.

[9] Section 587(1) of the Act provides:

      “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.”

[10] Having regard to the circumstances of this matter, I am satisfied that as the application was not accompanied by the fee prescribed by the Act, the application was not made in accordance with the Act. As such, the application is dismissed pursuant to s.587(1)(a) of the Act. An Order (PR590233) to this effect will be issued shortly.

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<Price code A, PR590229>