Sean Pipe v Austrans Container Service

[2015] FWC 4125

[2015] FWC 4125

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.394—Unfair dismissal

Sean Pipe
v
Austrans Container Service
(U2014/14861)

COMMISSIONER WILSON MELBOURNE, 22 JUNE 2015

Application for relief from unfair dismissal.

[1] On 6 November 2014, Mr Sean Pipe made an application for remedy for unfair dismissal under s.394 of the Fair Work Act 2009. Mr Pipe’s employment had been terminated by Austrans Container Service on 16 October 2014.

[2] The matter was the subject of conciliation however, the matter was not resolved. Consequently, directions were issued and the matter was listed for hearing.

[3] Mr Pipe was directed to file an outline of submissions, any witness statements and other documentary material he wished to rely on by noon, on 22 December 2014.

[4] Mr Pipe did not comply with this direction and the matter was listed for a non compliance hearing before Commissioner Johns on 6 February 2015.

[5] Mr Pipe did not attend the non compliance hearing. Austrans Container Service made an oral application, pursuant to s.399A of the Act, that the matter be dismissed as Mr Pipe had failed to comply with the direction of the Fair Work Commission. Commissioner Johns waived compliance with the Fair Work Commission Rules 2013 and accepted Austrans Container Service’s oral application.

[6] On 10 February 2015, Mr Pipe was sent correspondence informing him of Austrans Container Service’s section 399A application. Mr Pipe was directed to file submissions and other documentary material in respect of Austrans Container Service’s application by close of business, on 15(insert date). Mr Pipe was advised that if he failed to comply with this direction, his application would be dismissed.

[7] On 26 February 2015, Mr Pipe was sent a copy of the Commission’s correspondence dated 10 February 2015 and given until 4 March 2015 to respond. Again, Mr Pipe was advised that if he failed to respond, his application would be dismissed.

[8] Mr Pipe did not file any material with the Commission.

[9] Section 399A of the Act provides as follows:

399A Dismissing applications

(1) The FWC may, subject to subsection (2), dismiss an application for an order under Division 4 if the FWC is satisfied that the applicant has unreasonably:

(a) failed to attend a conference conducted by the FWC, or a hearing held by the FWC, in relation to the application; or

(b) failed to comply with a direction or order of the FWC relating to the application; or

(c) failed to discontinue the application after a settlement agreement has been concluded.

....
(2) The FWC may exercise its power under subsection (1) on application by the employer.

(3) This section does not limit when the FWC may dismiss an application.

[10] Section 593 of the Act provides that the Commission is not required to hold a hearing except as provided by the Act.

[11] As Mr Pipe did not file any material in opposition to the application to dismiss, I will determine the application on the papers.

[12] After considering all the material, Mr Pipe’s application for remedy from unfair dismissal is dismissed. An order giving effect to this decision will be issued today.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<Price code A, PR568498>