s.394 - Unfair dismissal

Application for an unfair dismissal remedy - application dismissed.

• [1] This decision concerns an application lodged by Mr Christopher Sunderland (Applicant) pursuant to s.394 of the Fair Work Act 2009 seeking a remedy in respect of his alleged unfair dismissal from the Australian Capital Territory (Respondent).

• [2] The matter was the subject of a conference conducted on 21 November 2025 during which conciliation was attempted but was unsuccessful. It was agreed that the matter would proceed to a hearing on 9 January 2026 and the Directions previously issued on 13 November were confirmed.

• [3] Those Directions required the Applicant to file and serve his submissions, witness evidence and any documents he intended to rely upon by 4:00 pm on 28 November 2025. The Applicant did not file any material by the stipulated date.

• [4] On 2 December 2025, my chambers wrote to the Applicant noting his non-compliance and directing him to file the outstanding material by 9:00 am on 3 December 2025. The correspondence expressly advised the Applicant that failure to comply with the Directions without a reasonable explanation may result in his application being dismissed.

• [5] The Applicant did not respond to that correspondence and did not submit any material.

• [6] A further email was sent to the Applicant on 4 December 2025, giving him one final opportunity to comply with the Directions on 5 December 2025.

• [7] The Applicant has still not filed any material, nor has he made any contact with the Commission since the conference on 21 November 2025.

• [8] Section 587 of the Act confers upon the Commission a broad discretion to dismiss an application. It reads:

(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

(c) the application has no reasonable prospects of success.

(2) Despite paragraphs (1)(b) and (c), FWC must not dismiss an application under section 365 or 773 on the ground that the application:

• [9] The Applicant has unreasonably failed to comply with directions of the Commission. He has been given several extensions and clear warnings that his failure to comply could result in the dismissal of his application. I am therefore satisfied that, by failing to engage with the Commission's process, the Applicant has not demonstrated any genuine intention to pursue his unfair dismissal application. Accordingly, I have determined to dismiss the application for want of prosecution pursuant to s.587 of the Act.

• [10] An order dismissing the application will be issued with this decision.

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer