the Applicant v ATIV Pty Ltd
Citation: [2026] FWC 2288
At a glance
- Employees affected
- 1
What happened
the Applicant commenced an unfair dismissal claim against ATIV Pty Ltd after a workplace argument with a co-worker Marina Khishchenko about the war in Ukraine and subsequent discussions with director Oksana Pashoulia. The Applicant alleges she was made to feel unwelcome due to her Russian nationality and that the director forced her to leave by stating they could no longer work together. ATIV denies dismissing the Applicant, asserting she left voluntarily after a discussion about workplace behaviour. Evidence included text messages exchanged between the Applicant and the director, and testimony from a co-worker.
What was decided
The Fair Work Commission dismissed the Applicant’s unfair dismissal application. The Deputy President found that the Applicant was not dismissed by ATIV Pty Ltd nor forced to resign. The decision rested on the finding that the director did not fire her, but rather offered a choice between continuing employment with improved behaviour or leaving. The Commission noted the Applicant’s own statements and text messages which contradicted her claim of being fired.
What it means for employers
Employers should ensure clear communication regarding performance expectations and disciplinary actions to avoid misunderstandings that could be interpreted as termination. Documenting discussions and offering opportunities for improvement can help mitigate unfair dismissal claims. Addressing workplace conflict promptly is also crucial.
What it means for employees
Employees should carefully consider their options and document any interactions with employers if they feel pressured to leave a job. Understand the difference between voluntary resignation and being forced to resign, as this significantly impacts legal rights.
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/2026fwc2288.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 →