© 2026 Zoe. All rights reserved.
Zoe is a legal information platform. Always consult the Federal Register of Legislation for authoritative text.
[2015] FWC 8701
defendant. Application for remedy from unfair dismissal dismissed under s 399A(1)(b) of the Fair Work Act 2009
1 cited instrument linked from this judgment.
Ms Sommerville applied to the Fair Work Commission for unfair dismissal remedy after being terminated by McDonald's. Her application was filed late, and she was given directions to provide legal arguments and evidence by 20 November 2015. She failed to do so. The Commission tried to contact her multiple times by phone, text, and email, but she did not respond. McDonald's then applied to have her case dismissed because she wasn't following the Commission's directions. Ms Sommerville was given a final chance to respond by 11 December 2015 and was warned her case would be dismissed if she didn't comply. She still didn't respond or file any documents. The Commission dismissed her application under section 399A of the Fair Work Act, which allows dismissal where an applicant unreasonably fails to comply with directions. The decision was made based on the written documents alone, without a hearing.
AI-generated legal information, not legal advice. Zoe can make mistakes. Check the cited source, and for advice about your situation consult a qualified Australian lawyer.
s.394 - Unfair dismissal
[1] On 30 September 2015, Ms Shania Sommerville made an application for remedy for unfair dismissal under section 394 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). Ms Sommerville's employment had been terminated by McDonald's on 15 January 2015.
[2] As the application was filed out of time, directions were issued and the matter was listed for an extension of time conference/hearing.
[3] Ms Sommerville was directed to file an outline of argument and statement of evidence she wished to rely on by noon, on 20 November 2015.
[4] Ms Sommerville did not comply with this direction.
[5] On 25 November 2015, a Fair Work Commission staff member left a voicemail and sent a text message to Ms Sommerville, asking that she contact the Commission regarding her application.
[6] On 26 November 2015, a further voicemail was left for Ms Somerville to contact the Commission and an email was sent regarding her overdue submissions. Ms Somerville was advised if she no longer wanted to pursue her application, she should file a Notice of Discontinuance.
[7] On 27 November 2015, a further voicemail was left for Ms Sommerville asking that she urgently contact the Commission.
[8] Ms Sommerville did not respond to any contact from the Commission.
[9] On 27 November 2015, McDonald's filed an objection to the application and sought the dismissal of Ms Sommerville's application. McDonald's based their objection on grounds which include failure to comply with directions.
[10] On 1 December 2015, Ms Sommerville was sent correspondence informing her of McDonald's section 399A application. Ms Sommerville was directed to file submissions and other documentary material in respect of McDonald's application by close of business, on 11 December 2015. Ms Sommerville was advised that if she failed to comply with this direction, her application would be dismissed.
[11] Ms Sommerville did not file any material with the Commission.
[12] Section 399A of the Act provides as follows:
(1) The FWC may, subject to subsection (2), dismiss an application for an order under Division 4 if the FWC is satisfied that the applicant has unreasonably:
(a) failed to attend a conference conducted by the FWC, or a hearing held by the FWC, in relation to the application; or
(b) failed to comply with a direction or order of the FWC relating to the application; or
(c) failed to discontinue the application after a settlement agreement has been concluded.
(2) The FWC may exercise its power under subsection (1) on application by the employer.
(3) This section does not limit when the FWC may dismiss an application.
[13] Section 593 of the Act provides that the Commission is not required to hold a hearing except as provided by the Act.
[14] As Ms Sommerville did not file any material in opposition to the application to dismiss, I will determine the application on the papers.
[15] After considering all the material, Ms Sommerville's application for remedy from unfair dismissal is dismissed. An order giving effect to this decision will be issued today.
Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer
var _gaq = _gaq || []; _gaq.push(['_setAccount', 'UA-9592794-1']); _gaq.push(['_trackPageview']); (function() { var ga = document.createElement('script'); ga.type = 'text/javascript'; ga.async = true; ga.src = ('https:' == document.location.protocol ? 'https://ssl' : 'http://www') + '.google-analytics.com/ga.js'; var s = document.getElementsByTagName('script')[0]; s.parentNode.insertBefore(ga, s); })();
Sommerville
McDonalds Australia [2015] FWC 8701
Application for remedy from unfair dismissal dismissed under s 399A(1)(b) of the Fair Work Act 2009