1 Fair Work Act 2009 s.394—Unfair dismissal Casey Smith v Awx Staff Pty Ltd (U2023/11356) VICE PRESIDENT CATANZARITI SYDNEY, 12 JANUARY 2024 Application for an unfair dismissal remedy [1] Casey Smith (the Applicant) was employed by AWX Staff Pty Ltd (the Respondent) from 11 April 2023 until they were dismissed on 31 October 2023. [2] On 16 November 2023, the Applicant made an application for a remedy for unfair dismissal under s.394 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). [3] The legal business name nominated by the respondent in their F3 – Employer’s Response Form in this matter was AWX Pty Ltd. An unfair dismissal application should be lodged against the entity that employed the Applicant. [4] On 20 December 2023, correspondence was sent to the Applicant regarding the name discrepancy. The correspondence directed the Applicant to respond requesting to amend the application to name a different entity as their former employer or to provide submissions as to why the entity they had nominated was the correct entity. The Applicant was required to respond by 2 January 2024. No response was received at this time. [5] Further correspondence was sent to the Applicant on 4 January 2024 and they were required to respond by 5:00pm on 9 January 2024. It was in this correspondence that the Applicant was advised the application would be dismissed without any notice if no response was received. [6] To date, the Applicant has not responded to any of the correspondence sent by my Chambers. [7] 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: [2024] FWC 77 DECISION [2024] FWC 77 2 (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, or an application under section 527F that does not consist solely of an application for a stop sexual harassment order, 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. [8] 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). [9] In the circumstances I have decided to dismiss the application for want of prosecution pursuant to s.587(3)(a) of the Act. [10] An order to that effect will issue with this decision. VICE PRESIDENT Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer <PR770141>