Tracie Ketcher v Small Animal Specialist Hospital Pty Limited

Case [2023] FWC 724


[2023] FWC 724

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009

s.394—Unfair dismissal

Tracie Ketcher
v

Small Animal Specialist Hospital Pty Limited

(U2023/1496)

COMMISSIONER BISSETT

MELBOURNE, 28 MARCH 2023

Application for an unfair dismissal remedy

  1. On 24 February 2023 Miss Tracie Ketcher 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).

  1. The application was incomplete in that Miss Ketcher did not pay the required fee or file a completed waiver form.

  1. On 26 February 2023 the Commission emailed correspondence to Miss Ketcher’s nominated email address advising that her application required payment of the filing fee or a completed waiver form if she wished to proceed with the application. That correspondence also warned that if payment is not made or a waiver form is not received within 7 calendar days the application may be dismissed.

  1. On 27 February 2023 an SMS notification was sent to Miss Ketcher’s nominated telephone number advising of the requirement to action the payment request email from the Fair Work Commission.

  1. On 28 February 2023 the Commission emailed correspondence to Miss Ketcher’s nominated email address reminding that her application required payment of the filing fee or a completed waiver form if she wished to proceed with the application. That correspondence also warned that if payment is not made or a waiver form is not received, the application may be dismissed.

  1. A final attempt to contact Miss Ketcher on her nominated telephone number was made by the Commission on 15 March 2023 to obtain payment or a completed waiver form. A voicemail message was left advising Miss Ketcher that payment of the required fee was still outstanding.

  1. To date there has been no response from Miss Ketcher, the required fee has not been paid and a completed waiver form has not been received.

  1. 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.

  1. 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 prospect of success.

  1. I am satisfied that, as the application was not accompanied by the fee prescribed by the FW Act, the application was not made in accordance with the FW Act. As such, the application is dismissed pursuant to s.587(1)(a) of the FW Act.


COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<PR760599>

Details
AGLC
Tracie Ketcher v Small Animal Specialist Hospital Pty Limited [2023] FWC 724
Case
[2023] FWC 724
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Tracie Ketcher applied to the Fair Work Commission for a remedy for unfair dismissal against Small Animal Specialist Hospital Pty Limited. The application was incomplete as Miss Ketcher failed to pay the required fee or file a completed waiver form. Despite multiple warnings and attempts to contact her, Miss Ketcher did not respond and the required fee or waiver form was never submitted. The Fair Work Commission dismissed the application for failure to comply with the Fair Work Act.

The central legal issue before the Commission was whether Miss Ketcher's application met the requirements of the Fair Work Act. Specifically, the Commission needed to determine if the application was made in accordance with the Act, as required by s.587(1)(a) of the FW Act. Since the application was incomplete due to the lack of payment or a completed waiver form, the Commission found that the application was not made in accordance with the Act.

In reaching its decision, the Commission considered that Miss Ketcher had been repeatedly warned that her application was incomplete and that she had multiple opportunities to pay the required fee or file a completed waiver form. Despite these opportunities, Miss Ketcher did not respond and the application remained incomplete. Given the clear provisions of the Fair Work Act regarding application fees and the warnings provided to Miss Ketcher, the Commission concluded that the application was not made in accordance with the Act and was therefore dismissed.

The Fair Work Commission dismissed Miss Ketcher's application for a remedy for unfair dismissal, pursuant to s.587(1)(a) of the Fair Work Act.

Orders

Orders of the court

Full text does not contain this section.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.