Sally Dickson-Dent v LCA Gungahlin Pty Limited

[2024] FWC 2547

[2024] FWC 2547

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009

s.394—Unfair dismissal

Sally Dickson-Dent
v

LCA Gungahlin Pty Limited

(U2024/7686)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT EASTON SYDNEY, 17 SEPTEMBER 2024

Application for relief from unfair dismissal – unpaid application – dismissal under s.587 at the Commission’s initiative Application for an unfair dismissal remedy

1. On 3 July 2024 Ms Sally Dickson-Dent made an application to the Fair Work Commission for a remedy for unfair dismissal under s.394 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth).

1. For the following reasons I am satisfied that Ms Dickson-Dent’s application has not been made in accordance with the Act and that it is appropriate to dismiss the application.

1. Section 395 of the Act is in the following terms:

“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.”

1. Ms Dickson-Dent’s application was incomplete because Ms Dickson-Dent did not pay the required fee or file a completed request to waive the fee.

1. Commission staff contacted Ms Dickson-Dent on the following dates:

·   8 July by telephone, email and SMS; and

·   22 July 2024 by telephone.

1. Ms Dickson-Dent was advised that she must pay the filing fee or apply for a waiver if she wished to proceed with the application. Ms Dickson-Dent was also warned that the application could be dismissed if the filing fee was not paid.

1. To date there has been no response from Ms Dickson-Dent, no fee paid and no waiver request received.

1. Section 587 of the 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.

…

(3)       The FWC may dismiss an application:

(a)       on its own initiative; or

(b)       on application.”

1. Ms Dickson-Dent’s application was not made in accordance with the Act (per s.587(1)(a)) because the prescribed fee (per s.395) has not been paid or waived. Section 587 confers a discretion on the Commission to dismiss Ms Dickson-Dent’s application.

1. Ms Dickson-Dent has been given ample opportunity to rectify the deficiency in the application (see generally Bond v Carbridge Pty Ltd T/A Carbridge [2024] FWC 1302 at [15]-[16] and the cases cited therein). The Commission’s inquiries and warnings have largely been ignored.

1. In the circumstances I am satisfied that Ms Dickson-Dent’s application should be dismissed.

1. I have separately made an order dismissing Ms Dickson-Dent’s application (PR779347).

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<PR779346>