the Applicant v Commonwealth of Australia (No 2)
Citation: [2026] FCA 764
What happened
The Applicant worked for the Commonwealth (Centrelink and Child Support Agency) from 2013 to 2021. She raised concerns about workplace issues, including the behaviour of a colleague, Omar Bahemia. The Commonwealth had complaints management policies in place. The Applicant initially held an irregular/intermittent employee role before transitioning to an APS3 position. A personal relationship with her colleague occurred between 2014 and 2016. She commenced two proceedings against the Commonwealth in 2022, concerning how her complaints were handled.
What was decided
The Federal Court dismissed both of the Applicant’s applications (WAD 156/2022 and WAD 165/2022) against the Commonwealth. The court did not make findings about a witness's conduct, but acknowledged some aspects of her complaints were valid. Costs applications can be made by July 3, 2026, following specific procedures outlined by the Court.
What it means for employers
Employers should ensure their complaints management policies are followed and that responses to employee concerns are appropriate. It is important to consider how workplace issues involving colleagues are handled and documented. The Commonwealth’s response was examined in relation to its obligations under relevant legislation.
What it means for employees
Employees have the right to raise concerns about workplace issues without fear of adverse action. Understanding employer complaints processes and documenting any concerns raised can be important. This case highlights the importance of appropriate responses to employee grievances.
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/2026/2026fca0764Want 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 today sorted? A Day Pass is 25 questions over 24 hours, no account. Get a Day Pass — $4.99
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