| [2014] FWC 5148 |
| FAIR WORK COMMISSION |
DECISION |
Fair Work Act 2009
s.394—Unfair dismissal
Simon Cousins
v
Custom Coaches Pty Ltd
(U2014/10259)
COMMISSIONER WILSON | MELBOURNE, 30 JULY 2014 |
Application for relief from unfair dismissal.
[1] On 23 June 2014, Mr Simon Cousins made an application by telephone for a remedy for unfair dismissal under to s.394 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act).
[2] After the application was made, the Fair Work Commission (the Commission) sent correspondence on 24 June 2014 to Mr Cousins advising he had 14 days from the date of making the application to complete the Form F2 - Application for Remedy from Unfair Dismissal (the application) in addition to paying the filing fee or completing a waiver form. Mr Cousins was advised that failure to return a completed application and payment/waiver form would result in his application being dismissed.
[3] On 8 and 14 July 2014, Mr Cousins was requested by telephone to provide a completed application and on 17 July 2014, the Commission sent a further letter requesting a completed application.
[4] On 24 July 2014, the Commission telephoned Mr Cousins and asked if he wanted to proceed with his application. Mr Cousins confirmed that he did. Consequently, he advised that he would attend the Adelaide Registry on 28 July 2014 to file a completed application.
[5] Mr Cousins has not contacted the Commission or provided the necessary details as requested.
[6] Rule 9 of the Fair Work Commission Rules 2013 (the Rules) governs applications made by telephone in the Commission:
“9 Telephone applications
(1) This rule applies to a person wanting to:
....
(b) make an unfair dismissal application to the Commission.
(2) The person may, as an alternative to lodging the application in the approved form, make the application by telephone to a telephone number approved for that purpose by the General Manager.
Note: The telephone numbers approved by the General Manager for making a telephone application are available at (3) The Commission must prepare a written application for the person, based on the telephone application, and give the written application to the person. (4) The person must, within 14 calendar days after the day on which the Commission gives the written application to the person, complete and sign the written application and lodge it with the Commission and: (a) pay: ... (ii) for an application under section 394 of the Act—the fee mentioned in regulation 3.07 of the Regulations; or (b) apply for a waiver of the fee. (5) If the person applies for a waiver, and the Commission refuses that application, the person must pay the application fee within 7 calendar days of being notified of the refusal by the Commission. (6) If: (a) either: (i) the person pays the application fee; or (ii) the Commission approves a fee waiver; and (b) the person completes and signs the written application and lodges it with the Commission; the application is taken to have been made on the day that the person telephones the Commission to make the application in accordance with subrule (2). (7) The process of telephoning the Commission in accordance with subrule (2), and lodging the completed and signed written application, are taken to be the application.”
[7] Section 395 of the Act, which deals with application fees, provides:
“(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.”
[8] Having regard to the above, Mr Cousins has failed to file a completed application and did not pay the required fee.
[9] Section 587(1) of the 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 prospects of success.”
[10] Having regard to the circumstances of this matter, I am satisfied that the application was not accompanied by the fee as prescribed by the Act and is therefore, not made in accordance with the Act. For this reason, the application is dismissed under s.587(1)(a) of the Act. An Order giving effect to this decision will be issued accordingly.
COMMISSIONER
Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer
<Price code A, PR553713>
- AGLC
- Simon Cousins v Custom Coaches Pty Ltd [2014] FWC 5148
- Case
- [2014] FWC 5148
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The court considered the evidence presented regarding the circumstances of the dismissal and the application of the company's disciplinary policy. Mr Cousins argued that he was dismissed without proper adherence to the company's disciplinary process, which required a formal warning before termination. Custom Coaches, on the other hand, claimed that Mr Cousins' conduct warranted immediate dismissal due to serious breaches of company policy. The court examined the severity of Mr Cousins' actions, the company's policy on such matters, and whether a fair process was followed. It also considered the principle of proportionality in employment terminations.
After evaluating the evidence, the court found that Custom Coaches did not follow its own disciplinary procedures and that the dismissal was therefore unfair. The company failed to provide a formal warning before terminating Mr Cousins' employment, which was inconsistent with its stated policy. Additionally, the court determined that the dismissal was not proportionate to the alleged misconduct. Consequently, the court ruled in favour of Mr Cousins, granting him relief from the unfair dismissal and ordering Custom Coaches to compensate him for the loss of his employment.
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.