Ryan Castle v Bungalow Oosh

[2025] FWC 2694

[2025] FWC 2694

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION AND ORDER

Fair Work Act 2009

s.394—Unfair dismissal

Ryan Castle
v

Bungalow OOSH

(U2025/4215)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT EASTON SYDNEY, 11 SEPTEMBER 2025

Application for an unfair dismissal remedy – dismissal under s.587(1)(c) at the Commission’s initiative for want of prosecution.

1. On 7 April 2025, Mr Ryan Castle made an unfair dismissal application to the Fair Work Commission under s.394 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth).

1. On 16 May 2025 Commission staff were advised that the parties had reached an in-principle agreement to resolve Mr Castle’s application.

1. Since then Mr Castle has not discontinued his application or taken any steps to prosecute his case.

1. Commission staff attempted to contact Mr Castle on 2 June, 17 June, 1 September, 2 September and 5 September 2025 by telephone, SMS and email.

1. Section 587 allows the Commission to dismiss an application on the Commission’s own initiative in the early stages of the proceedings for want of prosecution. If an applicant’s conduct or omissions show that they are no longer willing to participate in their own case the Commission is not required to persevere with the application (see Viavattene v Health Care Australia [2013] FWCFB 2532 at [39]).

1. I am satisfied that Mr Castle has been on notice that his application could be dismissed under s.587, and has had the opportunity to put a case for consideration on all matters material to the decision to dismiss the application.

1. In the circumstances I am satisfied that the facility under s.587 can and should be engaged to dismiss Mr Castle’s application. I make the following order:

A.The application under s.394 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) made by Mr Ryan Castle on 7 April 2025 is dismissed.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<PR791644>