[2025] FWCFB 178
Citation: [2025] FWCFB 178
At a glance
- Employees affected
- 1
What happened
Olivia Wales appealed a decision by Fair Work Commissioner Simpson regarding her application for an extension of time to file an unfair dismissal application. Ms. Wales was dismissed from Thejo Australia Pty Ltd. She filed her application 14 days late, and the Commissioner refused the extension, citing a lack of exceptional circumstances. Ms. Wales claimed mental health issues, homelessness, and confusion regarding jurisdictional filing requirements contributed to the delay. The Commissioner limited his review of evidence to the period between the dismissal and the application filing, which Ms. Wales contested.
What was decided
The Full Bench of the Fair Work Commission allowed Ms. Wales’ appeal. They found the Commissioner made a significant error by limiting the scope of evidence considered to the period between the dismissal and the application filing. The Full Bench determined that Ms. Wales’ mental health and homelessness prior to the dismissal could have impacted her ability to file on time. The extension of time application was redetermined, and exceptional circumstances were found, granting the extension.
What it means for employers
Employers should be aware that the Fair Work Commission may consider circumstances preceding a dismissal when assessing an application for an extension of time to file an unfair dismissal claim. It is important to be mindful of an employee's potential vulnerabilities and ensure clear communication regarding deadlines and processes.
What it means for employees
Employees facing dismissal who are experiencing mental health issues or homelessness should seek legal advice promptly and gather relevant documentation to support their case for an extension of time to file an unfair dismissal application. Evidence of pre-dismissal circumstances can be relevant.
Every statement above is drawn from the published decision. Read the original here:
https://www.fwc.gov.au/documents/decisionssigned/pdf/2025fwcfb178.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 AI answers plain-English questions grounded on the full corpus.
Individual case summaries on this site are free. API + AI 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 by AI 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 →