Shaun White v Lakeview Hotel

[2021] FWC 2835

[2021] FWC 2835

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.394—Unfair dismissal

Shaun White
v
Lakeview Hotel
(U2021/3536)

COMMISSIONER BISSETT MELBOURNE, 18 MAY 2021

Application for an unfair dismissal remedy.

[1] On 25 April 2021 Mr Shaun White (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). Mr White alleged he was unfairly dismissed by Lakeview Hotel (the Respondent) on 8 April 2021.

[2] The application was incomplete in that Mr White did not pay the required fee or file a completed waiver form.

[3] On 28 April 2021 the Commission attempted to contact Mr White on his nominated telephone number to discuss payment of the required fee. However, Mr White did not answer the call. A voicemail message was left requesting him to check his email account as the Fee Waiver was not attached to the online lodgement.

[4] Later that day, the Commission emailed correspondence to Mr White’s nominated email address advising that his application required payment of the filing fee or a completed waiver form if he wished to proceed with the application. That correspondence also advised that if payment was not made or a waiver form was not received within 14 days, the application may be dismissed. An SMS notification was also sent to Mr White’s nominated telephone number, advising that there was a problem with his application and requesting he contact the Commission.

[5] On 6 May 2021 the Commission attempted to contact Mr White on his nominated telephone number regarding the outstanding payment. However, Mr White did not answer the call. A voicemail message was left requesting him to contact the Commission by 10 May 2021 as his application was still incomplete.

[6] On 7 May 2021 the Commission emailed correspondence to Mr White’s nominated email address advising that his application required payment of the filing fee or a completed waiver form if he wished to proceed with the application. That email correspondence attached a copy of a blank Fee Waiver application.

[7] A final attempt to contact Mr White was made by the Commission on 10 May 2021 to obtain payment or a completed waiver form. The call was not answered, and a voicemail message was left advising Mr White that payment of the required fee was still outstanding.

[8] To date there has been no response from Mr White, the required fee has not been paid and a completed waiver form has not been received.

[9] 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.

[10] Section 587(1) of the FW 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 prospect of success.

[11] Having regard to the circumstances of this matter, 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. An order 1 to this effect will be issued with this decision.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<PR729940>

 1   PR729941.