the Applicant v Flinders University of South Australia
Citation: [2022] FCA 1361
At a glance
- Employees affected
- 1
What happened
the Applicant was employed as a Senior Research Fellow at Flinders University from late 2016 to early 2017 under a three-month probationary contract. During her employment, the university made various demands and requirements of her work, some of which she opposed. She alleged she had exercised 24 workplace rights and that the university had taken 19 adverse actions against her. At the end of the probationary period, the university declined to continue her employment. She sought relief claiming the university contravened the Fair Work Act.
What was decided
the primary judge dismissed the Applicant's application for relief. The Applicant applied for an extension of time to appeal to the Federal Court, but this application was refused. The court found that during probation, the Respondent retained discretion to end employment without demonstrating a breach by the employee. The university's evidence that the Applicant was unable to work effectively with her supervisor and had created workplace tension was accepted by the primary judge. The proposed appeal had insufficient merit.
What it means for employers
During a probationary period, employers retain broad discretion to end employment if the relationship is not working out, without the usual constraints that apply after probation ends. However, even during probation, conduct cannot be motivated by the employee exercising genuine workplace rights.
What it means for employees
Employment during probation is less secure. Employers can more readily terminate probationary employees if they consider the fit unsatisfactory, though they cannot do so solely because the employee has exercised a workplace right.
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/2022/2022fca1361Want 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 →