Waruna Nanayakkara v Fujitsu Australia Ltd

[2025] FWC 221

[2025] FWC 221

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009

s.394—Unfair dismissal

Waruna Nanayakkara
v

Fujitsu Australia Ltd

(U2025/522)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT COLMAN MELBOURNE, 23 JANUARY 2025

Unfair dismissal application – application dismissed

1. Earlier today, I dismissed an unfair dismissal application made by Waruna Nanayakkara against Fujitsu Australia Ltd (Fujitsu) under s 394 for the Fair Work Act 2009 (Act). I now publish my decision, as I am required to do by s 601. It was clear from the parties’ correspondence to the Commission that Mr Nanayakkara remained employed by Fujitsu. Section 394 of the Act provides that an application for an unfair dismissal remedy may be made by ‘a person who has been dismissed’. Mr Nanayakkara was not such a person and had no standing to make an unfair dismissal application. I advised the parties that there was no proper basis for me to adopt the proposal of Mr Nanayakkara to ‘allow the application to remain in progress’ and permit him to notify the Commission when the redundancy process was completed. If Fujitsu terminates his employment, Mr Nanayakkara may lodge an unfair dismissal application at that time.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<PR783618>