[2025] FWC 2787
Citation: [2025] FWC 2787
At a glance
- Employees affected
- 1
What happened
the Applicant applied to the Fair Work Commission for an unfair deactivation remedy after being deactivated by Rasier Pacific Pty Ltd. He initially filed an unfair dismissal application on 20 June 2025, then a deactivation application on 8 July 2025, and again on 21 July 2025. Rasier Pacific Pty Ltd stated the deactivation occurred on 16 June 2025. the Applicant provided evidence of a final deactivation notice email dated 17 June 2025. The Commission initially misclassified the application.
What was decided
The Fair Work Commission found the Applicant’s application was made within the 21-day statutory period. The Commissioner determined the deactivation took effect on 17 June 2025, based on the email the Applicant received. Therefore, an extension of time to file the application was not required. If the deactivation had occurred on 16 June 2025, exceptional circumstances might have warranted an extension. The case will now proceed to a case management conference.
What it means for employers
Employers should ensure they accurately identify the type of application being made by employees and respond promptly. Misclassifying an application, or incorrect dates, can impact timelines and potentially lead to extensions of time being granted.
What it means for employees
Employees seeking remedies like unfair deactivation should be mindful of the strict time limits for filing applications. Providing clear evidence of the date the deactivation took effect is important.
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/2025fwc2787.pdfWant 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 →