the Applicant v Purfleet Taree Local Aboriginal Land Council
Citation: [2026] FWC 2345
At a glance
- Employees affected
- 1
What happened
the Applicant was employed as an Administration Officer – Special Projects by Purfleet Taree Local Aboriginal Land Council (PTLALC) from June 23, 2025, until December 31, 2025. She filed an unfair dismissal application on March 9, 2026, which was 47 days past the 21-day filing deadline. the Applicant cited mental health issues and alleged retaliatory actions from PTLALC’s CEO as reasons for the delay but provided no supporting evidence. The Fair Work Commission heard the case via video conference on June 24, 2026, with only PTLALC represented.
What was decided
The Fair Work Commission dismissed the Applicant's unfair dismissal application because she did not demonstrate exceptional circumstances to justify an extension of time for filing. The Commissioner found the Applicant’s explanation for the delay was unsatisfactory due to a lack of supporting medical evidence and failure to substantiate claims about the CEO’s actions. Furthermore, her employment period with PTLALC was less than the required 12 months for unfair dismissal eligibility.
What it means for employers
Employers should be aware that delays in receiving unfair dismissal applications are taken seriously by the Fair Work Commission. Applicants must provide compelling evidence to demonstrate exceptional circumstances when filing out of time, including medical documentation where health issues contribute to the delay. The minimum employment period requirements for unfair dismissal eligibility will also be considered.
What it means for employees
Employees seeking to file an unfair dismissal application outside the 21-day timeframe need to provide robust evidence demonstrating exceptional circumstances. This often includes medical records if health concerns contributed to the delay. Failure to do so, as in this case, can result in the application being dismissed.
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/2026fwc2345.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 →