the Applicant v MorethaNDIS Pty Ltd
Citation: [2026] FWC 2521
At a glance
- Employees affected
- 1
What happened
the Applicant initiated an application under section 365 of the Fair Work Act 2009 alleging unfair dismissal by MorethaNDIS Pty Ltd. She filed the application on December 25, 2025, which was one day outside the 21-day timeframe for lodging such applications. the Applicant cited reasons for the delay including an incorrect initial form and ongoing family issues involving domestic abuse. The Commission sought further information from her but she failed to provide it despite multiple attempts and extensions.
What was decided
The Fair Work Commission dismissed the Applicant’s application due to being filed out of time. the Commissioner found that while the applicant faced challenges, these did not constitute 'exceptional circumstances' justifying an extension. The Commission considered factors like the reason for delay, steps taken to dispute termination, potential prejudice to the employer, merits of the case and fairness. None of these weighed in favour of granting an extension.
What it means for employers
Employers should be aware that strict time limits apply to Fair Work applications. While extensions can be granted, applicants must demonstrate 'exceptional circumstances' with supporting evidence. Failure to provide requested information or adequately explain delays can result in the application being dismissed.
What it means for employees
Employees need to adhere to the 21-day timeframe for lodging unfair dismissal and other Fair Work applications. If facing difficulties meeting this deadline, it is crucial to seek legal advice promptly and gather evidence to support a request for an extension based on exceptional circumstances. Failure to do so may result in your application being rejected.
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/2026fwc2521.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 →