The applicant, who had been employed by the respondent before her dismissal, filed an unfair dismissal claim before the Commission. Shortly thereafter, the representative for the respondent communicated to Registry that he believed the claim ought not be accepted, and that he was recording the conversation to discuss the matter on the radio. Subsequently, the respondent emailed the Commission to confirm he would not participate in proceedings and corresponded further later the same month. The Commission advised the respondent that his communications were threatening and inappropriate.

Once a conciliation conference was scheduled in the proceedings, the respondent informed the Commission that he was unable to attend. Given the communications received by the Commission and Registry from the respondent, the Commission formed the view that conciliation would not assist in resolving this matter and made orders that the parties file appropriate forms, including that the applicant file an amended application, and that the matter be listed for hearing. The applicant did not file the required amended application and did not respond to communication from the Commission in the leadup to the scheduled show cause hearing, nor did she appear at the show cause hearing.

Commissioner Walkington determined that the applicant had sufficient opportunity to demonstrate her desire to continue with her unfair dismissal application and had not done so. Additionally, the Commissioner considered that while the behaviour of the respondent had been uncooperative and sometimes aggressive, that his conduct did not negate the need for the applicant to progress her claim. Accordingly, the Commissioner found that the applicant had failed to prosecute her claim and dismissed the application.

The decision can be read here.