Eguia v CPB Contractors Pty Ltd
Citation: [2021] FCA 273
At a glance
- Employees affected
- 1
What happened
Maritess Eguia was employed by CPB Contractors Pty Ltd as an ICT Projects Manager on the West Gate Tunnel Project from 8 April 2019 to 25 September 2019. Her employment was terminated during this period. She sought to bring a general protections application under Part 3-1 of the Fair Work Act alleging adverse action. The Fair Work Commission issued a certificate under section 368(3)(a) on 19 June 2020. Eguia filed her application in court on 23 July 2020, which was 20 days after the 14-day deadline specified in section 370(a)(ii).
What was decided
The court granted leave to Eguia to proceed 20 days out of time. The court was satisfied that Eguia had provided a satisfactory explanation for the delay in her affidavit, that she had established a prima facie case (the respondent's denials did not displace the allegations made under oath), and that any prejudice to the respondent (loss of employee witnesses) did not warrant refusing the extension. The delay of 13 months from termination was not inordinate.
What it means for employers
Courts have discretion to extend the time for bringing general protections applications. Employers cannot rely on strict time limits to escape proceedings if the applicant provides reasonable explanation and has a arguable case.
What it means for employees
Missed the strict 14-day deadline for general protections applications can sometimes be excused if the applicant explains the delay satisfactorily and shows a prima facie case exists.
Want this applied to your situation?
Reading the decision is free. FairWork Mate goes further — it reads the full case library and applies precedents like this one to your specific facts, citing the cases as it reasons. General information, not a guaranteed outcome or legal advice.
Every statement above is drawn from the published decision. Read the original here:
https://www.judgments.fedcourt.gov.au/judgments/Judgments/fca/single/2021/2021fca0273Want more cases like this?
FairWork Mate tracks Fair Work Ombudsman, Fair Work Commission and Federal Court decisions across Australia. The AI advisor answers plain-English questions grounded on the full corpus — awards cited, industry, penalty amounts and affected employee counts — with a citation to the underlying decision on every answer.
Individual case summaries on this site are free. Full-corpus advisor access is a paid product — Business Solo from $99/mo, 50% off your first 3 months for the first 100 signups.
Get notified on new Fair Work cases
Free email alerts when we publish new underpayment decisions, penalty orders, and workplace law updates.
Free forever. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
This summary was drafted from the published decision and reviewed before publishing. It is general information, not legal advice. For your specific situation, speak to the Fair Work Ombudsman (13 13 94) or a qualified lawyer. About these summaries & corrections →