the Applicant v The University of Sydney & Ors
Citation: [2025] FWC 1936
At a glance
- Employees affected
- 1
What happened
the Applicant commenced proceedings in the Fair Work Commission concerning his employment with The University of Sydney. He alleged adverse action related to a dismissal. The University argued the application lacked jurisdiction, asserting the Applicant had not been dismissed but instead resigned. the Commissioner considered whether the Applicant felt forced to resign and whether the employer’s conduct contributed to that feeling.
What was decided
The Fair Work Commission upheld the jurisdictional objection. the Commissioner found that the Applicant did not experience a dismissal, but rather resigned. The Commission stated that the question was whether the employee felt they were being forced to resign, and considered the employer’s conduct in reaching this conclusion. The application was therefore dismissed on jurisdictional grounds. As stated in the decision, “the jurisdictional objection was upheld”.
What it means for employers
Employers should be mindful of their conduct and its potential impact on employees, even if an employee ultimately resigns. Actions that could be perceived as coercive or creating a hostile work environment could lead to a finding of adverse action, even in the absence of a formal dismissal.
What it means for employees
Employees who feel pressured to resign should document their experiences and consider seeking legal advice. The Commission’s decision highlights the importance of demonstrating that the resignation was effectively a forced resignation due to the employer’s actions.
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.fwc.gov.au/documents/decisionssigned/pdf/2025fwc1936.pdfWant more cases like this?
FairWork Mate tracks Fair Work Ombudsman, Fair Work Commission and Federal Court decisions across Australia. The full dataset, with structured fields for awards cited, industry, penalty amounts and affected employee counts, is available through the Business API. FairWork Mate answers plain-English questions grounded on the full corpus.
Individual case summaries on this site are free. API + advisor access is a paid product. Contact us for pricing or a 50% off first month.
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 →