Allana Brodie v Tracey Ivanovski & Leanne Morris [2020] FWC 3594

1 Fair Work Act 2009 s.394—Unfair dismissal Allana Brodie v Tracey Ivanovski & Leanne Morris (U2020/5946) VICE PRESIDENT CATANZARITI SYDNEY, 9 JULY 2020 Application for an unfair dismissal remedy. [1] Allana Brodie (the applicant) states that her most recent period of service working for Tracey Ivanovski and Leanne Morris ran from 20 August 2019 until her dismissal took effect on 14 April 2020. On 23 April 2020, she applied to the Fair Work Commission (the Commission) for an unfair dismissal remedy under s.394 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). [2] On 18 May 2020, Harbour Day Spa Pty Ltd (the respondent) filed an Employer’s Response (Form F3), objecting to Miss Brodie’s application on the basis that she had not completed the minimum employment period to be eligible for an unfair dismissal remedy. It also said that it had complied with the Small Business Fair Dismissal Code in effecting the applicant’s dismissal. [3] My chambers wrote to the applicant on 16 June 2020, requiring her to provide a statement to support her claim that she had completed the minimum employment period. She was asked to provide this information by 4:00 pm on 23 June 2020. We received no response from the applicant by that deadline. [4] On 24 June 2020, my chambers sent further correspondence to the applicant, directing her to provide a response by 4:00 pm on 29 June 2020. She was advised that in the absence of a reply, her application may be dismissed. [5] To date, the applicant has not responded to the Commission’s correspondence. [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 [2020] FWC 3594 DECISION -- 1 of 2 -- [2020] FWC 3594 2 (b) the application is frivolous or vexatious; or (c) the application has no reasonable prospects of success. Note: For another power of the FWC to dismiss an application for a remedy for unfair dismissal made under Division 5 of Part 3-2, see section 399A. (2) Despite paragraphs (1)(b) and (c), the 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) The FWC may dismiss an application: (a) on its own initiative; or (b) on application.” [7] The words, “[w]ithout 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. VICE PRESIDENT Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer <PR720851> -- 2 of 2 --