Thomas Zuidam v Coles Supermarkets
[2022] FWC 1793
•20 JULY 2022
| [2022] FWC 1793 |
| FAIR WORK COMMISSION |
| DECISION |
Fair Work Act 2009
s.394—Unfair dismissal
Thomas Zuidam
v
Coles Supermarkets
(U2022/6440)
| cOMMISSIONER bISSETT | MELBOURNE, 20 JULY 2022 |
Application for relief from unfair dismissal – incomplete application – dismissal under s.587 at the Commission’s initiative.
On 19 June 2022, Mr Thomas Zuidam (Applicant) made an application to the Fair Work Commission for a remedy for unfair dismissal pursuant to s.394 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (FW Act).
The application form filed by the Applicant was incomplete in that he did not name the Respondent and did not include payment of the required fee or a completed fee waiver form.
On 21 June 2022, the Commission attempted to contact the Applicant on his nominated telephone number to discuss his application. The Applicant did not answer the call and there was no option to leave a voicemail message.
Later that day, the Commission emailed correspondence to the Applicant’s nominated email address advising that his application required payment of the filing fee or a completed fee waiver form if he wished to proceed with the application. The correspondence also advised that the Applicant was required to provide further details as the application was incomplete and that the name and contact information for the Respondent needed to be provided to the Commission. That correspondence warned that if the requested information and filing fee or a completed fee waiver form was not provided within 14 days, the application may be dismissed. The correspondence was also sent to the Applicant’s Representative.
As the required documentation was not received, on 4 July 2022 the Commission telephoned the Applicant. The Applicant verbally advised the name of the Respondent and provided contact details and said that his representative would either file a completed application or withdraw the matter. The Applicant advised that he was unable to pay the filing fee at this time. The Commission advised the Applicant that if he or his representative do not contact the Commission by the end of the week to make payment and file a completed application the application would be at risk of being dismissed.
On the same day, the Commission contacted the Applicant’s representative to discuss the matter. The Applicant’s representative advised that they had only become aware that an application had been made when they received correspondence from the Commission on 21 June 2022. The Applicant’s representative further advised that they have requested further information from the Applicant if they are to represent him.
To date, the Applicant has not paid the required fee or sought a waiver.
Section 395 of the FW Act, which deals with application fees, provides as follows:
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
(c)the circumstances in which all or part of the fee may be waived or refunded.
Section 587(1) 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 these circumstances, I have determined that the application was not made in accordance with the FW Act.
As such, the application is dismissed under s.587(1)(a) of the FW Act. An Order[1] to this effect will be issued shortly.
COMMISSIONER
[1] PR743625
Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer
<PR743624>
0
0
0