Stephen Ennis v ArchiApps Pty Ltd Summary

[2023] FWC 11

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009

s.394—Unfair dismissal

Stephen Ennis
v

ArchiApps Pty Ltd

(U2018/3495)

COMMISSIONER BISSETT

MELBOURNE, 10 JANUARY 2023

Application for an unfair dismissal remedy – deregistration – application dismissed

On 4 April 2018 Mr Stephen Ennis (the Applicant) made an application pursuant to s.394 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (FW Act) seeking relief from unfair dismissal. The Applicant had been employed by ArchiApps Pty Ltd (the Respondent) and was dismissed on 4 April 2018.

On 11 May 2018 the Commission was notified that the Respondent had entered liquidation and on 21 May 2018 the Commission received an ASIC Form 505 confirming that a liquidator had been appointed.

The Decision issued on 7 March 2019[1] stayed Mr Ennis’ application on the basis that the Respondent was in liquidation and pursuant to s.500(2) of the Corporations Act 2001, the Application was not able to proceed except by leave of the Court.

On 29 December 2022 the Commission performed a search on the ASIC company database which showed that the Respondent had been deregistered on 1 October 2022.

Section 587 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 prospects of success.

In the circumstances I am satisfied that Mr Ennis’ application has no reasonable prospects of success.

As such, I order that the application be dismissed pursuant to s.587(1)(c) of the Fair Work Act 2009.

COMMISSIONER

[1] [2019] FWC 1480

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The matter before the Fair Work Commission was an application by Stephen Ennis against ArchiApps Pty Ltd for relief from unfair dismissal. Mr Ennis, the Applicant, sought to have his dismissal by ArchiApps Pty Ltd, the Respondent, declared unfair under section 394 of the Fair Work Act 2009. The dismissal occurred on 4 April 2018, and the application was lodged with the Commission on the same day. The Respondent subsequently entered liquidation on 11 May 2018, and a liquidator was appointed on 21 May 2018. The Commission had previously stayed the application due to the Respondent's liquidation, but later discovered that the Respondent had been deregistered on 1 October 2022.

The primary legal issue for the Commission to decide was whether Mr Ennis' application had any reasonable prospects of success, given the deregistration of the Respondent. This was particularly pertinent in light of section 587 of the Fair Work Act 2009, which allows the Fair Work Commission to dismiss an application if it has no reasonable prospects of success. The Commission had to consider whether the deregistration of the Respondent meant that the application was now moot and whether the Applicant could still seek relief in the absence of a Respondent entity to be held accountable.

The Commission concluded that Mr Ennis' application had no reasonable prospects of success due to the deregistration of the Respondent. The deregistration meant there was no legal entity to enforce any decision made by the Commission. The Commission found that the application was now effectively moot and dismissed the application pursuant to section 587(1)(c) of the Fair Work Act 2009. This decision was made in the context of ensuring that the Fair Work Act was applied fairly and justly, and that applications were not pursued in circumstances where they could not result in any meaningful relief for the Applicant.

In conclusion, the Fair Work Commission dismissed Mr Ennis' application for relief from unfair dismissal on the basis that the application had no reasonable prospects of success due to the deregistration of the Respondent, ArchiApps Pty Ltd. The Commission's decision was grounded in the statutory provisions of the Fair Work Act 2009, which allow for the dismissal of applications under certain conditions. This decision highlights the importance of the existence of a legal entity to enforce any remedy that might be granted in employment disputes under the Act.

Stephen Ennis v ArchiApps Pty Ltd

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established