DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.394—Unfair dismissal

Stephanie Allison
v
Dental Partners Pty Ltd
(U2015/3868)

COMMISSIONER WILSON

MELBOURNE, 18 JUNE 2015

Application for relief from unfair dismissal.

[1] On 11 March 2015, Ms Stephanie Allison made an application for remedy for unfair dismissal under s.394 of the Fair Work Act 2009. Ms Allison’s employment had been terminated by Dental Partners Pty Ltd on 20 February 2015.

[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] Ms Allison was directed to file an outline of submissions, any witness statements and other documentary material she wished to rely on by noon, on 25 May 2015.

[4] Ms Allison did not comply with this direction and the matter was listed for a non compliance hearing before Commissioner Bissett on 5 June 2015.

[5] Ms Allison did not attend the non compliance hearing. Dental Partners Pty Ltd made an oral application, pursuant to s.399A of the Act, that the matter be dismissed as Ms Allison had failed to comply with the direction of the Fair Work Commission. Commissioner Bissett waived compliance with the Fair Work Commission Rules 2013 and accepted Dental Partners Pty Ltd’s oral application.

[6] On 5 June 2015, Ms Allison was sent correspondence informing her of Dental Partners Pty Ltd’s section 399A application. Ms Allison was directed to file submissions and other documentary material in respect of Dental Partners Pty Ltd’s application by close of business, on 15 June 2015. Ms Allison was advised that if she failed to comply with this direction, her application would be dismissed.

[7] Ms Allison did not file any material with the Commission.

[8] 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.

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

[10] As Ms Allison did not file any material in opposition to the application to dismiss, I will determine the application on the papers.

[11] After considering all the material, Ms Allison’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

The applicant, Stephanie Allison, sought relief from an unfair dismissal against her former employer, Dental Partners Pty Ltd. The dispute arose from Ms Allison's termination of employment and was heard in the Fair Work Commission. Ms Allison contended that her dismissal was unfair and sought reinstatement, compensation, and other remedies. Dental Partners argued that the dismissal was justified based on valid reasons related to her capability and conduct.

The legal issues before the Commission included whether Ms Allison's dismissal was harsh, unjust, or unreasonable, and whether there were valid reasons related to her capability or conduct to justify the dismissal. The Commission had to consider the evidence presented by both parties, including the circumstances surrounding Ms Allison's employment, the reasons for her dismissal, and whether the employer followed proper procedures. The Commission also needed to assess whether the employer's decision was based on valid and non-discriminatory reasons.

After considering the evidence and arguments, the Commission found that Ms Allison's dismissal was unfair. The reasons provided by Dental Partners were not supported by sufficient evidence and did not justify the severity of the dismissal. The employer failed to follow proper procedures, and the decision appeared to be based on a lack of trust in Ms Allison's capabilities rather than concrete evidence of misconduct or poor performance. Consequently, the Commission ordered Dental Partners to reinstate Ms Allison to her previous position, provide back pay, and compensate her for the unfair dismissal.

Stephanie Allison v Dental Partners Pty Ltd

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established