| [2023] FWC 1661 |
| FAIR WORK COMMISSION |
| DECISION |
Fair Work Act 2009
s.394—Unfair dismissal
Senitta Cady
v
Care Coordinated Services
(U2023/4690)
| COMMISSIONER BISSETT | MELBOURNE, 11 JULY 2023 |
Application for an unfair dismissal remedy
On 29 May 2023 Senitta Cady (the Applicant) made an application to the Fair Work Commission for a remedy for unfair dismissal pursuant to s.394 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (FW Act).
The application was incomplete in that the Applicant did not pay the required fee or file a completed waiver form.
On 1 June 2023, the Commission attempted to contact the Applicant on their nominated telephone number to notify the Applicant that, further to the lodgement of their Form F2, a document which related to the Applicant’s final pay out was attached as a waiver as opposed to a completed fee waiver form.
Later that day, the Commission emailed correspondence to the Applicant’s nominated email address advising that their application required payment of the filing fee or a completed waiver form if they wished to proceed with the application. That correspondence also warned that if payment was not made or a waiver form was not received by 15 May 2023, the application may be dismissed.
On 14 June 2023, the Commission attempted to contact the Applicant on their nominated telephone number to obtain payment or a completed waiver form. As the call was not answered, a voice message was left advising the Applicant to either make payment of the filing fee or to provide a completed waiver application.
Later that day, the Commission emailed correspondence to the Applicant’s nominated email address advising that their application required payment of the filing fee or a completed waiver form if they wished to proceed with the application. The email further stated:
Please pay the application fee within 7 calendar days (or apply to have the fee waived) so we can progress your case.
…
If you don’t make payment within 7 days your application may be dismissed.
On 20 June 2023, the Commission attempted to contact the Applicant on their nominated telephone number to obtain payment or a completed waiver form. As the call was not answered, a voice message was left advising the Applicant to either make the necessary payment of the filing fee or provide a completed waiver application.
On 22 June 2023, the Commission attempted to contact the Applicant on their nominated telephone number to obtain payment or a completed waiver form and to advise the Applicant that a document relating to their final pay out was attached as a waiver application. As the call was not answered, a voice message was left advising the Applicant to either make the necessary payment of the filing fee or provide a completed waiver application.
To date the Applicant has not paid the required fee or completed a waiver form.
Section 395 of the FW Act, which deals with application fees, provides as follows:
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.
Section 587(1) of the FW 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 prospect of success.
I am satisfied that, as the application was not accompanied by the fee prescribed by the FW Act, the application was not made in accordance with the FW Act. As such, the application is dismissed pursuant to s.587(1)(a) of the FW Act.
COMMISSIONER
Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer
<PR764058>
- AGLC
- Senitta Cady v Care Coordinated Services [2023] FWC 1661
- Case
- [2023] FWC 1661
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The central legal issue in this case was whether the FWC was justified in dismissing Cady's application for unfair dismissal due to her failure to comply with the fee requirements as stipulated by the FW Act. Specifically, the court had to determine if the application was made in accordance with the Act and whether the dismissal was appropriate under the circumstances. The relevant sections of the FW Act that guided the court's decision were section 395, which outlines the application fee requirements, and section 587(1)(a), which provides grounds for dismissing an application that does not comply with the Act.
The FWC determined that the application was not made in accordance with the FW Act because it was not accompanied by the required fee. Despite multiple attempts to contact Cady and inform her of the need to either pay the fee or complete a fee waiver form, she did not take any action to rectify the incomplete application. The Commission concluded that the application was properly dismissed under section 587(1)(a) of the FW Act. Commissioner Bissett found that there was no basis to grant an exception or waiver of the fee requirements in this case.
In conclusion, the FWC upheld the dismissal of Senitta Cady's application for unfair dismissal remedy against Care Coordinated Services. The court found that the application did not comply with the fee requirements of the FW Act, and despite several attempts to notify Cady of the need to complete the application, she failed to take any action. Therefore, the application was dismissed under section 587(1)(a) of the FW Act.
Orders
Orders of the court
Full text does not contain this section.
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.