Benchmark WA Industrial Relations Case Database

Application to deal with contraventions involving dismissal Kieran Douglas Watts

[2026] FWC 1845 Fair Work Commission 2026-05-21
Source
Deputy President Beaumont
Not yet cited by other cases
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 · 3

[P]General protections (FW Act Pt 3-1) [S]Unfair dismissal (WA) [S]Unfair dismissal (federal)

Cases cited in this decision · 1

Cited
[2013] FWCFB 2532 — Northern Co-Operative Meat Company Ltd - Booyong Service Processing...
"…ey did not provide a response. [7] If an applicant’s conduct or omissions show that they are no longer willing to participate in their own case, the Commission is not required to persevere with the application (see...…"
Archived text (663 words)
1 Fair Work Act 2009 s.365 - Application to deal with contraventions involving dismissal Kieran Douglas Watts (C2026/751) DEPUTY PRESIDENT BEAUMONT PERTH, 21 MAY 2026 Application to deal with contraventions involving dismissal – dismissal under s 587(3)(a) for want of prosecution [1] On 23 January 2026, Kieran Douglas Watts (the Applicant) lodged a general protections involving dismissal application (the Application) under s 365 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) (the Act). [2] The Application is incomplete in that the Applicant failed to specify the sections of the Act that they allege were breached when they were dismissed. [3] Commission staff telephoned the Applicant’s nominated telephone number on 29 January 2026. The Applicant did not answer the call and a voice message was left requesting that they call the Commission’s helpline. Commission staff then sent an email to the Applicant informing them that their Application was incomplete for the reasons set out above. The Applicant was directed to provide a completed Application form within a set period. An SMS was sent to the Applicant’s nominated telephone number requesting that they call the Commission’s helpline due to an incomplete matter. [4] The Applicant telephoned the Commission’s Registry on 29 January 2026. Commission staff explained to the Applicant why their Application was incomplete. The Applicant requested that the original Form F8 Application they lodged be resent to their email address. Commission staff emailed the original Form F8 to the Applicant shortly after the call concluded. The Applicant did not provide an amended, completed Form F8 within the set period. [5] My Chambers emailed the Applicant on 1 May 2026. The Applicant was informed that their Application remained incomplete as their application did not disclose the contraventions of the general protections provisions in Part 3-1 of the Act that they allege the Respondent had contravened. The Applicant was directed to provide an amended, completed Form F8 within a set period. The Applicant was again placed on notice that their Application was very likely to be dismissed if they did not comply with the directions. The Applicant did not respond to the correspondence or comply with the directions. [6] Section 587 of the Act allows the Commission to dismiss an application if it is apparent that an applicant has stopped pursuing or participating in the proceedings that they commenced. [2026] FWC 1845 DECISION AND ORDER [2026] FWC 1845 2 Section 587(3)(a) allows the Commission to dismiss an application on its own initiative, so long as the applicant has been afforded procedural fairness. In relation to this Application, the Applicant was afforded the opportunity to provide a completed Form F8 on multiple occasions. Additionally, the Applicant was placed on notice that their Application was very likely to be dismissed if they did not provide a response. [7] If an applicant’s conduct or omissions show that they are no longer willing to participate in their own case, the Commission is not required to persevere with the application (see Viavattene v Health Care Australia [2013] FWCFB 2532 at [39]). [8] I am satisfied that the Applicant’s conduct in failing to respond to the Commission’s correspondence dated 29 January 2026 and 1 May 2026 in respect of the incomplete Application demonstrates that they are no longer willing to participate in their own case. [9] The Applicant has been provided with the opportunity to inform the Commission that they wish to proceed with the Application and has been on notice since 29 January 2026 of the likely consequences if they did not do so. To date, the Commission has received no response. [10] For these reasons, I have decided to dismiss the application on my own initiative for want of prosecution, utilising the facility provided for by s 587(3)(a) of the Act. I make the following order: A. The application lodged by Kieran Douglas Watts on 23 January 2026 under s 365 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) is dismissed. DEPUTY PRESIDENT Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer <PR810222>