the Applicant v Antree DNH Pty Ltd
Citation: [2026] FWC 2486
At a glance
- Employees affected
- 1
What happened
the Applicant was dismissed from Antree DNH Pty Ltd on 24 April 2026, following a redundancy process announced on 30 March 2026. The company informed her of the redundancy and four-week notice period in writing. She lodged an unfair dismissal application on 17 May 2026, two days outside the statutory timeframe. the Applicant argued that her last day of employment should have been 27 April 2026 due to a public holiday, which would have made her application timely. The company objected to the application based on the late filing and other grounds.
What was decided
The Fair Work Commission found that the Applicant’s dismissal took effect on 24 April 2026, making her unfair dismissal application two days late. Deputy President Beaumont considered whether exceptional circumstances existed to extend the time for lodging the application but concluded they did not. The Commission dismissed the unfair dismissal application and issued an order concurrently with its reasons.
What it means for employers
Employers should ensure clear communication regarding termination dates, especially when notice periods are involved. Confirming the final date of employment in writing can prevent misunderstandings about when a dismissal takes effect. Compliance with the Small Business Fair Dismissal Code is not automatically sufficient to overcome jurisdictional issues.
What it means for employees
Employees should carefully review any written communication regarding their termination, including notice periods and last day of employment. If there's uncertainty about the effective date of dismissal, seeking clarification promptly is crucial. Late applications for unfair dismissal are unlikely to be granted an extension without exceptional circumstances.
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/2026fwc2486.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 →