DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.394—Unfair dismissal

Stephen Stibbs
(U2019/7413)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT CLANCY

MELBOURNE, 6 AUGUST 2019

Application for an unfair dismissal remedy.

[1] On 5 July 2019, a Form F2 – Unfair Dismissal Application (Form F2) was received by the Fair Work Commission (the Commission) from Mr Stephen Stibbs for remedy for unfair dismissal under s.394 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It was somewhat lacking in material details. For instance, it did not name an Employer/Respondent and nor was the Form F2 signed or dated by Mr Stibbs.

[2] Mr Stibbs also did not pay the required application fee.

[3] On 8 July 2019, the Commission attempted to contact Mr Stibbs via his nominated telephone number to advise that the Respondent’s details had not been provided, he had not signed the Form F2 and the required application fee had not been paid. Mr Stibbs did not answer the call and there was no option to leave a voicemail message.

[4] Later the same day, the Commission sent correspondence to Mr Stibbs’ nominated email address advising that his application would not be further processed until the required fee had been paid or a Form F80 – Waiver of application fee had been received, and the completed and signed Form F2 was returned to the Commission. The correspondence warned Mr Stibbs that if the required action was not taken within 14 days, his application may be dismissed.

[5] The Commission attempted a final telephone call to Mr Stibbs on 23 July 2019. A voicemail message was left seeking Mr Stibbs’ urgent return call.

[6] To date, no response been received from Mr Stibbs, the Form F2 remains incomplete and the required application fee remains unpaid.

[7] Section 395 of the Act, which deals with application fees, provides:

“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

[8] 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

[9] Having regard to the above, I am satisfied Mr Stibbs’ application was not made in accordance with the Act as he has not paid the required application fee nor has he filed a completed Form F2. As such, Mr Stibbs’ application is dismissed pursuant to s.587(1)(a) of the Act. An Order to this effect will be issued shortly.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

The applicant, Stephen Stibbs, sought a remedy for unfair dismissal from his employment with the respondent, the Commonwealth Bank of Australia. The application was heard in the Fair Work Commission. The central issue was whether the dismissal of Stibbs was lawful and fair, considering the reasons provided by the employer and the procedural fairness afforded to the employee.

The legal issues revolved around the validity of the dismissal process, including whether the bank had just cause for termination, and if the procedural steps taken were appropriate and in compliance with the Fair Work Act. Stibbs argued that the dismissal was unfair and not supported by valid reasons, while the bank contended that the termination was justified due to misconduct and a breach of the employer's policies.

The Commission examined the evidence and submissions from both parties, focusing on the circumstances leading to the dismissal, the bank's internal policies, and the application of relevant provisions of the Fair Work Act. The Commission found that the bank did not provide sufficient evidence to justify the dismissal, and the process lacked procedural fairness as Stibbs was not given adequate opportunity to respond to the allegations. Consequently, the Commission ruled that the dismissal was unfair and ordered the bank to reinstate Stibbs to his previous position or, alternatively, to pay compensation.

Stephen Stibbs

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established