Skip to main content
FairWorkMate
FWCFair Work Commission · 30 December 2025

the Applicant v DOWN TO EARTH PTY LTD

Citation: [2026] FWC 2396

At a glance

Employees affected
1

What happened

the Applicant lodged an unfair dismissal application with the Fair Work Commission on February 13, 2026. She stated she worked for Down To Earth Pty Ltd from October 23, 2025, and was dismissed on January 30, 2026. This meant her employment lasted approximately three months. The Commission contacted the Applicant multiple times regarding the minimum employment period requirement and an outstanding application fee, but received no response.

What was decided

The Fair Work Commission Deputy President Beaumont dismissed the Applicant’s unfair dismissal application. The decision was made because she did not meet the required six-month minimum employment period to be eligible for an unfair dismissal claim. The Commission also noted that the Applicant failed to respond to multiple requests and warnings regarding the application fee and minimum employment period. As such, the application had no reasonable prospects of success.

What it means for employers

Employers should ensure they are aware of the six-month minimum employment period for unfair dismissal claims. This applies to small businesses. Consistent communication with applicants about missing information or fees can help streamline processes and potentially avoid unnecessary proceedings.

What it means for employees

Employees must meet the minimum employment period before lodging an unfair dismissal claim. It is important to respond promptly to communications from the Fair Work Commission regarding applications, including providing necessary documentation and payment.

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.

unfair-dismissalgeneral-protectionsredundancyunderpaymentsham-contractingmodern-award-variationenterprise-agreement

Every statement above is drawn from the published decision. Read the original here:

https://www.fwc.gov.au/documents/decisionssigned/pdf/2026fwc2396.pdf

Want 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 →

← All cases