Flageul v WeDrive Pty Ltd
Citation: [2021] FCAFC 102
At a glance
- Employees affected
- 1
What happened
Yan Flageul was Chief Executive Officer of WeDrive Pty Ltd and was terminated on 21 December 2017 by non-executive director Steven Mace. Flageul alleged the company took adverse action against him because he exercised workplace rights, citing eleven events he claimed constituted complaints or inquiries relating to his employment. These included concerns about non-disclosure of material issues to the company regarding a transaction.
What was decided
A Full Court dismissed Flageul's appeal. The primary judge preferred the evidence of Mace and other respondents over Flageul's account regarding the reasons for dismissal. The court found the respondents proved that the dismissal was taken for reasons including non-disclosure issues and performance concerns, not because Flageul exercised workplace rights. The presumption under s 361 of the Fair Work Act was displaced.
What it means for employers
Directors can dismiss a CEO for legitimate business reasons such as non-disclosure of material issues in transactions, even if the employee has made various complaints or inquiries. The onus rests on the employee to prove adverse action was taken for a proscribed reason.
What it means for employees
Making complaints about employment matters does not automatically protect you from dismissal. Employers can dismiss executives for legitimate reasons such as failure to disclose material information. You must prove the adverse action was specifically because of the complaint.
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/full/2021/2021fcafc0102Send your details to Liquid Employment Lawyers
Liquid Employment Lawyers is a paid legal service and our referral partner, not free Fair Work advice. Tell them what has happened and a member of their team will call you back. For free general guidance, use our tools or call the Fair Work Ombudsman on 13 13 94.
Prefer to read first? About Liquid Employment Lawyers · Not sure if you need a lawyer? Read the legal help guides
Want 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. The full FWC and Federal Court library behind every advisor answer is on Pro.
FairWork Mate AI
This is one decision. Pro reads all of them.
Free case pages cite the top 250 decisions. Pro opens the full Fair Work Commission and Federal Court library, cross-references your own situation against it, and cites the decision behind every answer — plus document upload, so it can read your letter or contract line by line. 150 questions a month, cancel anytime.
Just need this week sorted? A 7-Day Pass is 50 questions over 7 days, no account. Get a 7-Day Pass — $14.99
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