1 Fair Work Act 2009 s.394 - Application for unfair dismissal remedy Mr David Newman v RACV Royal Pines Resort (U2026/7633) DEPUTY PRESIDENT BEAUMONT PERTH, 18 JUNE 2026 Application for an unfair dismissal remedy – application fee not paid or waived – application not made in accordance with the Act - application dismissed. [1] On 4 May 2026, Mr David Newman (the Applicant) made an unfair dismissal application (the Application) to the Fair Work Commission under s 394 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) (the Act). [2] In addition to the below issue, it is apparent that the Applicant lodged their Application prematurely, that is, before their dismissal took effect. In their Application, the Applicant wrote that they did not know the exact date their dismissal took effect, but that they had been issued a show cause letter. However, the Respondent supplied a copy of the Applicant’s termination letter dated 5 May 2026, which provided for their immediate dismissal. [3] The Application was not made in accordance with the Act (see s 587(1)(a) of the Act) because the prescribed fee (see s 395 of the Act) has not been paid or waived. [4] On 7 May 2026, Commission staff contacted the Applicant, directing that the Application fee was to be paid or a fee waiver form completed. The Applicant was instructed to provide a response by 14 May 2026 and placed on notice that their Application may be dismissed if the Commission did not receive a response in that timeframe. An SMS was sent to the Applicant’s nominated telephone number requesting that they call the Registry due to an incomplete matter. [5] On 15 May 2026, Commission staff contacted the Applicant to remind them that the Application fee was outstanding. The Applicant was again directed to pay the Application fee or provide a completed fee waiver form by 19 May 2026. The Applicant was again placed on notice that their Application may be dismissed if this was not completed by the provided deadline. [6] My Chambers emailed the Applicant on 11 June 2026. The Applicant was again directed to pay the Application fee or provide a completed fee waiver form within a set period. In addition to the outstanding fee, the Application was directed to provide brief submissions as to [2026] FWC 2263 DECISION AND ORDER [2026] FWC 2263 2 why I should exercise my power under s 586(b) of the Act to waive the premature nature of the Application. The correspondence again placed the Applicant on notice that their Application would be dismissed if no payment or waiver was received by the provided deadline. [7] The Applicant has not responded to the Commission’s correspondence of 7 May 2026, 15 May 2026 or 11 June 2026 in respect of the outstanding fee. [8] Section 587 of the Act confers a discretion on the Commission to dismiss the Application. I am satisfied that the Applicant has had the opportunity to put forward a case for consideration on all matters material to the making of the decision to dismiss the Application under s 587 (see generally Bond v Carbridge Pty Ltd T/A Carbridge [2024] FWC 1302 at [15]- [16] and the cases cited therein). The Applicant has been given ample opportunity to rectify the outstanding Application fee; however, the Commission’s enquiries and warnings have been disregarded. [9] I have decided to dismiss the Application using the power available under s 587(1)(a) of the Act and make the following order: A. The Application under s 394 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) made by Mr David Newman on 4 May 2026 is dismissed. DEPUTY PRESIDENT Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer <PR811142>