Surendra Bhandari v Pearson Facilities Services Pty Ltd and the Butchers Block Cafe and Deli Pty Ltd

[2022] FWC 570

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION
Fair Work Act 2009
s.394 - Application for unfair dismissal remedy
Surendra Bhandari
v
Pearson Facilities Services Pty Ltd and The Butchers Block Cafe and Deli Pty Ltd
(U2021/3191)

COMMISSIONER CAMBRIDGE

SYDNEY, 16 MARCH 2022

Application for an unfair dismissal remedy
[1]      The applicant, Surendra Bhandari, has failed to properly prosecute his case. Despite repeated opportunities being provided to the applicant to enable him, with the apparent assistance of a lawyer, to properly identify and name the correct respondent, he has failed to do so. Further, the applicant has not provided any basis upon which to persuade the Fair Work Commission that there is any reasonable likelihood that he will be able to identify the correct respondent and subsequently prosecute his unfair dismissal claim.
[2]      Therefore, pursuant to s.587 of the Fair Work Act 2009, the application is dismissed for want of prosecution and because the application has no reasonable prospects of success.
[3]      An Order [PR739304] dismissing the matter will be issued concurrently with this Decision.

COMMISSIONER
Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer
<PR739303>

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Surendra Bhandari sought relief from the Fair Work Commission under the Fair Work Act 2009 for an unfair dismissal remedy against Pearson Facilities Services Pty Ltd and The Butchers Block Cafe and Deli Pty Ltd. Despite multiple chances to amend his application and correctly identify the parties involved, Bhandari failed to do so, despite legal assistance. The Commission was tasked with determining whether Bhandari’s failure to properly identify the respondents meant his application should be dismissed.

The primary legal issue was whether the application could be dismissed for want of prosecution and lack of reasonable prospects of success. The Commission considered whether Bhandari had made a sufficient attempt to correct the identification error in his application and whether there was any likelihood he could successfully identify the correct respondents. The decision hinged on whether these failures warranted the dismissal of his case under section 587 of the Fair Work Act.

The Fair Work Commission concluded that Bhandari had not sufficiently identified the correct respondents in his application. The Commission found that despite repeated opportunities, Bhandari had not provided any basis to suggest that he could successfully identify the correct parties involved. Given this, the Commission dismissed the application for want of prosecution and because it lacked reasonable prospects of success. The Commission noted the failure of the applicant to take advantage of the opportunities provided to rectify the procedural error.

The Fair Work Commission dismissed the application and ordered that the matter be closed. The dismissal was based on the applicant’s inability to properly identify the respondents and the lack of any reasonable prospects that the application could succeed if allowed to proceed. An order was issued to reflect the dismissal of the application.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established