TERMINATION OF EMPLOYMENT – extension of time – s.394 Fair Work Act 2009 – applicant lodged application for unfair dismissal remedy outside of 21-day time limit – respondent objected on basis of application being lodged out of time and case of genuine redundancy – Commission dealt with extension of time matter first – Commission must be satisfied ‘exceptional circumstances’ for delay [Nulty] – applicant claimed notified of termination while in Japan and evidence went to difficulties gathering thoughts, lack of access to internet and information and inability to obtain advice – emerged during hearing that applicant was not contemplating making application regarding termination while in Japan as believed she had been made redundant and was focused on whether termination payment was in accordance with legal entitlement – applicant only became aware after 21-day period of potential unfair dismissal claim after being advised that casual employee of respondent who was also dismissed was being ‘brought back’ – Commission satisfied applicant only formed view that her termination was not result of genuine redundancy after she conversed with former colleagues upon returning from Japan – once she was told respondent was re-engaging former staff member, short period of time elapsed before she filed applicant for unfair dismissal – honest and reasonably held belief that an earlier redundancy may not have been genuine based on plausible information, may constitute ‘exceptional circumstances’ [Bananacoast] – Commission satisfied test met in this instance, given unusual feature to applicant’s case that it was only on 21st day after termination that she first developed doubts as to genuineness of redundancy – extension of time granted – matter referred for further directions so jurisdictional objection and merits of application could be heard and determined. Okamoto v GBW GAPbuster Worldwide P/L
…
