Scott Pope v Youngs Norwest Pty Ltd Summary

[2025] FWC 2726

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION AND ORDER

Fair Work Act 2009

s.394—Unfair dismissal

Scott Pope
v

Youngs Norwest Pty Ltd

(U2025/8747)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT EASTON

SYDNEY, 12 SEPTEMBER 2025

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

On 21 May 2025, Mr Scott Pope made an unfair dismissal application to the Fair Work Commission under s.394 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth).

Mr Pope did not attend a telephone conciliation conference scheduled for 20 June 2025.

Commission staff tried to contact Mr Pope on 20 June, 25 June and 30 July 2025 about whether he wants to continue his unfair dismissal claim. Mr Pope has not responded to the Commission’s inquiries.

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]).

I am satisfied that Mr Pope has had the opportunity to put a case for consideration on all matters material to the decision to dismiss the application under s.587. In the circumstances I am satisfied that the facility under s.587 can and should be engaged to dismiss Mr Pope’s application. I make the following order:

A.The application under s.394 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) made by Mr Scott Pope on 21 May 2025 is dismissed.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Scott Pope filed an application for unfair dismissal against Youngs Norwest Pty Ltd under section 394 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) on 21 May 2025. Mr Pope did not attend the scheduled telephone conciliation conference on 20 June 2025. The Fair Work Commission attempted to contact Mr Pope on three occasions in June and July 2025 to ascertain whether he wished to continue his claim. Mr Pope did not respond to these inquiries.

The legal issue before the Fair Work Commission was whether Mr Pope’s conduct or omissions showed that he was no longer willing to participate in his own case. The Commission has the authority under section 587 to dismiss an application on its own initiative if the applicant has abandoned the case. The Fair Work Commission must consider whether the applicant has had the opportunity to put forward a case for consideration on all matters relevant to the decision. The Commission concluded that Mr Pope had been provided with the opportunity to present his case but had failed to respond to the Commission’s inquiries, thereby indicating that he was no longer willing to participate in his own case.

The Fair Work Commission found that Mr Pope's failure to respond to the Commission's attempts to contact him demonstrated that he was no longer willing to participate in his own case. The Commission determined that it was appropriate to dismiss the application under section 587. The Fair Work Commission ordered that the application made by Mr Scott Pope on 21 May 2025 be dismissed.

Scott Pope v Youngs Norwest Pty Ltd

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established