s.394 - Application for unfair dismissal remedy

Application for an unfair dismissal remedy - section 587 - application dismissed.

[1] On 15 August 2025, Mr Jose Aguilera Alvarez applied to the Fair Work Commission under s 394 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) contesting his dismissal by CBG Management Pty Ltd.

[2] Mr Alvarez's application was listed for two conciliations before a Commission staff member on 23 September and 22 October 2025. Mr Alvarez did not attend either conciliation. The matter was allocated to my Chambers, and on 12 December 2025, I issued directions for the filing of material and listed the matter for hearing.

[3] Mr Alvarez's materials were due by 2 January 2025. He did not comply with this direction. My Chambers wrote to the parties and advised Mr Alvarez that he had until 12:00pm AWST, 8 January 2026 to provide his materials. Mr Alvarez was notified that if he did not respond, it could result in his unfair dismissal application being dismissed.

[4] Mr Alvarez did not respond or comply with the revised deadline for his materials. On 8 January 2026, my Chambers informed the parties I was considering dismissing Mr Alvarez's application under s 587(1)(c) of the Act on the basis his application had no reasonable prospects of success. Mr Alvarez was informed that he had until 12 January 2026 to make any submissions. To date, Mr Alvarez has not responded to any contact from my Chambers.

[5] Section 587 of the Act states as follows:

(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.

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:

• [6] I refer the decision of Deputy President Easton in Bond v Carbridge Pty Ltd T/A Carbridge,[1] where at [11] - [16] of the decision, the Deputy President summarised the relevant principles that apply to the exercise of the Commission's power under s 587. I respectfully agree and adopt the Deputy President's observations.

[7] In this matter, I consider it appropriate to exercise my discretion to dismiss Mr Alvarez's application under s 587(3)(c) of the Act. Section 587 should be engaged cautiously. However, Mr Alvarez has not attended any of the listings for this matter, has not filed materials in support of his case and has not responded to any contact from my Chambers. Without Mr Alvarez's participation, his case has no reasonable prospects of success.

• [8] The application is therefore dismissed. An order will issue accordingly.[2]

[1] [2024] FWC 1302.

[2] PR795883.

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer