William Panos v P&C Fencing

[2020] FWC 4513

[2020] FWC 4513

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.394—Unfair dismissal

William Panos
v
P&C Fencing
(U2020/8341)

VICE PRESIDENT CATANZARITI SYDNEY, 26 AUGUST 2020

Application for an unfair dismissal remedy.

[1] On 17 June 2020, the Fair Work Commission (the Commission) received an application from William Panos (the Applicant) for a remedy for unfair dismissal under s.394 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act) in respect to his employment with P&C Fencing.

[2] The application was listed before a Commission staff conciliator on 22 July 2020. The Applicant did not attend the conciliation. Neither party requested for a second conciliation to scheduled.

[3] The application was then allocated to me. My chambers sent correspondence to the Applicant on 6 August 2020, directing him to advise us by 4:00 pm on 13 August 2020 whether he still pressed his application. However, we received no response from the Applicant by that time.

[4] On 14 August 2020, my chambers sent further correspondence to the Applicant, directing him to provide a response by 4:00 pm on 19 August 2020. He was advised that in the absence of a reply, his application may be dismissed without further notice to him.

[5] To date, the Applicant has not responded to any of my chambers’ written correspondence, nor have my chambers heard further from him.

[6] Section 587 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

(c) the application has no reasonable prospects of success.

(2) Despite paragraphs (1)(b) and (c), FWC must not dismiss an application under section 365 or 773 on the ground that the application:

(a) is frivolous or vexatious; or

(b) has no reasonable prospects of success.

(3) FWC may dismiss an application:

(a) on its own initiative; or

(b) on application.

[7] The words, “Without limiting when FWC may dismiss an application” at the commencement of s.587(1) of the Act, establish that the jurisdiction of the Commission to dismiss an application is not limited to the circumstances set out in s.587(1)(a), (b) and (c).

[8] In the circumstances I have decided to dismiss the application for want of prosecution pursuant to s.587(3)(a) of the Act.

[9] An order to that effect will issue with this decision.

VICE PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<PR722159>