Seven Hunter v Wallingtons Water Rural and Garden

Case

[2014] FWC 7332

16 OCTOBER 2014

No judgment structure available for this case.

[2014] FWC 7332
FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION


Fair Work Act 2009

s.394—Unfair dismissal

Seven Hunter
v
Wallingtons Water Rural and Garden
(U2014/12280)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT GOOLEY

MELBOURNE, 16 OCTOBER 2014

Application for relief from unfair dismissal.

[1] On 4 September 2014, Mr Seven Hunter made an application for a remedy for unfair dismissal under s.394 of the Fair Work Act 2009.

[2] Mr Hunter advised that he commenced employment with Wallingtons Water Rural and Garden on 18 March 2014 and that his dismissal took effect on 15 August 2014.

[3] On 5 September 2014, correspondence was sent to Mr Hunter pointing out that on the basis of the information contained in the application, he had not served the minimum employment period.

[4] On 19 September 2014, further correspondence was sent which required Mr Hunter to advise the Fair Work Commission within 14 days whether he wished to proceed with his application.

[5] Mr Hunter did not reply to that correspondence.

[6] Section 382 of the Act provides that a person is protected from unfair dismissal if they have completed a period of employment of at least the minimum employment period.

[7] Section 383 of the Act sets out the minimum employment period:

    383 Meaning of minimum employment period

    The minimum employment period is:

    (a) if the employer is not a small business employer—6 months ending at the earlier of the following times:

      (i) the time when the person is given notice of the dismissal;

      (ii) immediately before the dismissal; or

    (b) if the employer is a small business employer—one year ending at that time.

[8] In the circumstances of this matter, I am satisfied Mr Hunter has not completed the required minimum employment period and his application has no reasonable prospects of success.

[9] Section 587(1) of the Act provides:

    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.

[10] Consequently, the application is dismissed under s.587(1)(c) of the Act. An Order to this effect will be issued shortly.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<Price code A, PR556687>

Actions
Download as PDF Download as Word Document


Cases Citing This Decision

0

Cases Cited

0

Statutory Material Cited

0