Fair Work Act 2009

s.394 - Unfair dismissal

Application for an unfair dismissal remedy - minimum employment period - dismissal under s.587(1)(c) at the Commission's initiative - application has no reasonable prospects of success.

• [1] On 29 April 2025, Ms Shien Fujihara made an unfair dismissal application under s.394 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) (the Act).

• [2] For the following reasons I am satisfied that Ms Fujihara's application has no reasonable prospects of success and should be dismissed.

• [3] Ms Fujihara stated in her application that she commenced employment with Jayde Harvey and McDonald's on 28 February 2025 and that her dismissal took effect on 8 April 2025.

• [4] Sections 382 and 383 of the Act provide that a person is only eligible to make an unfair dismissal application if they have completed a minimum period of employment before their dismissal. Section 383 defines the minimum employment period to be either 6 months or 12 months, depending on whether the respondent was a small business employer at the time of the dismissal. On the information provided by Ms Fujihara, her period of employment was less than 6 months.

• [5] Commission staff attempted to contact Ms Fujihara on 2 May 2025 by telephone and followed up with an email regarding the minimum employment period. On 16 May 2025, Commission staff attempted to contact Ms Fujihara by telephone. On 26 June 2025, my Chambers emailed Ms Fujihara requiring a response by 3 July 2025. No response has been received.

Section 587 - General Principles

• [6] Section 587 allows the Commission to dismiss an application on the Commission's own initiative in the early stages of the proceedings. Protracted proceedings can be avoided when there is no reasonable prospect of an outcome other than the dismissal of the application.

• [7] The power under s.587 should be used with caution, particularly if the matter involves complex questions of fact or law.[1] An application should not be dismissed under s.587 unless it is very clear that there are no reasonable prospects of success and the power under s.587 is not available if there are disputed facts that could affect the outcome of the proceedings.

• [8] Importantly, applicants must be given a fair opportunity to show that their application does in fact have some reasonable prospects of success.

Does Ms Fujihara's application have any reasonable prospects of success?

• [9] The Commission cannot consider the fairness of Ms Fujihara's dismissal until it is clear that she is eligible to make an unfair dismissal claim.

• [10] The information provided by Ms Fujihara indicates that she is not eligible to make an unfair dismissal application because she was employed for less than six months.

• [11] I am satisfied that Ms Fujihara's claim has no reasonable prospect of success and that it is appropriate to dismiss her application. I make the following order:

1. The application under s.394 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) made by Ms Shien Fujihara on 29 April 2025 is dismissed.

[1] See generally Bond v Carbridge Pty Ltd T/A Carbridge [2024] FWC 1302 at [11]- [16].

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer