Benchmark WA Industrial Relations Case Database

Tanya Murphy v Murray House Wentworth Aged Care Ltd T/A Murray House

[2023] FWC 2988 Fair Work Commission 2023-01-01
Source
Deputy President Boyce
Not yet cited by other cases
Applicant: Tanya Murphy
Respondent: Murray House Wentworth Aged Care Ltd T/A Murray House
This case hasn't been analysed yet.
Generate ratio, outcome, key facts, concept tags and cited-case edges. Takes ~15–30 seconds.
Sign in to analyse

Authority signal

Not yet cited by other cases Signal-weighted score: 0.0
Derived from how later decisions have treated this case. Dark green = leading authority, green = positively treated, grey = neutral or sparse data, amber = caution, red = treated negatively.

Concept tags · 4

[P]Unfair dismissal (WA) [P]Unfair dismissal (federal) [P]Procedural fairness at dismissal stage [P]Public sector discipline

Cases cited in this decision · 1

Doubted
[2011] FWA 5458 — Rebecca Tomas v Symbion Health
"…nd that the application: [2023] FWC 2988 3 (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]...…"
Archived text (684 words)
1 Fair Work Act 2009 s.394—Unfair dismissal Tanya Murphy v Murray House Wentworth Aged Care Ltd T/A Murray House (U2023/9042) DEPUTY PRESIDENT BOYCE SYDNEY, 15 NOVEMBER 2023 Application for an unfair dismissal remedy Overview [1] On 19 September 2023, Ms Tanya Murphy (Applicant) filed an application pursuant to s.394 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Act) with the Fair Work Commission (Commission), being an application for an unfair dismissal remedy (Application). The Respondent to the Application is Murray House Wentworth Aged Care Ltd T/A Murray House. [2] Direction [2] of the Directions issued on 30 October 2023 reads: “[2] By 4.00pm AEDT on Monday, 13 November 2023, the Applicant must file with the Commission and serve on the Respondent an outline of submissions, witness statements, and any documents in support of their application.” [3] The Applicant did not comply with Direction [2]. [4] On 14 November 2023, at 10:32am AEDT, the following email (Show Cause Email) was sent to the Applicant: “Dear Ms Murphy Re: U2023/9042 - Tanya Murphy v Murray House Wentworth Aged Care Ltd T/A Murray House I refer to the matter above. Background On 30 October 2023, the Fair Work Commission issued Directions in this matter. Orders [2] of those directions read as follows: [2023] FWC 2988 DECISION [2023] FWC 2988 2 [2] By 4.00pm AEDT on Monday, 13 November 2023, the Applicant must file with the Commission and serve on the Respondent an outline of submissions, witness statements, and any documents in support of their application. To date, Chambers has not received any materials in compliance with Order [2]. Further directions regarding show cause In view of the foregoing, the Deputy President directs as follows: [1] The Applicant is to file with the Commission, and serve on the Respondent, written submissions regarding their non-compliance with directions. Further, the Applicant is to make submissions as to why this matter should not be dismissed. The Applicant is to comply with this Direction by no later than 4:00pm AEDT Today, 14 November 2023. [2] If the Applicant does not comply with Order [1] above, or if the Deputy President is not satisfied by the Applicant’s submissions, the matter may be dismissed without further notice. Yours faithfully [Associate]” [5] The Applicant has made no response to the Show Cause Email. Legislative Provisions [6] Section 587 of the Act reads: “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. 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: [2023] FWC 2988 3 (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] In Rebecca Tomas v Symbian Health [2011] FWA 5458, Commissioner Gooley stated the following with respect to the operation of s.587 of the Act: “[57] Section 587 gives [the Fair Work Commission] the power to dismiss a matter. Section 587(a), (b) and do not limit [the Fair Work Commission’s] power to dismiss matters for other reasons.” Consideration [8] As the Applicant has made no attempt to comply with Direction [2] and/or the Show Cause Email, and has failed to contact the Commission or otherwise explain their non- compliance, I have decided to dismiss their Application. [9] In dismissing the Applicant’s Application, I find that the Applicant’s non-compliance with Direction [2] and the Show Cause Email to be wholly unexplained, and wholly unsatisfactory. [10] Pursuant to s.587(3)(a) of the Act, the Application is dismissed for want of prosecution. An Order dismissing the Application will be published contemporaneously with this decision. DEPUTY PRESIDENT Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer <PR768301>