the Applicant v ERH Refrigerated Transport Pty Ltd
Citation: [2026] FWC 2636
At a glance
- Employees affected
- 1
What happened
the Applicant was a linehaul truck driver for ERH Refrigerated Transport Pty Ltd, transporting refrigerated goods between Melbourne and Wagga Wagga. On December 3, 2025, a load of ice cream defrosted during a trip due to the trailer's temperature being incorrectly set (minus 1°C instead of minus 22°C). This resulted in a loss exceeding $100,000 for ERH. the Applicant was dismissed on December 8, 2025, receiving payment in lieu of notice and subsequently filed an unfair dismissal application.
What was decided
The Fair Work Commission found that the Applicant’s dismissal was not unfair. The Commission determined that the Applicant failed to set the temperature correctly and did not check it during his trip. While he disputed some aspects of ERH's reasoning, including a prior warning, the Commission considered his actions contributed to the loss. The application for an unfair dismissal remedy was dismissed.
What it means for employers
Employers have the right to dismiss employees for valid reasons related to conduct or capacity. Thorough documentation and clear communication regarding expectations are crucial. However, employers should ensure they have sufficient evidence to support claims of misconduct before taking disciplinary action.
What it means for employees
Employees have a responsibility to follow procedures and maintain standards in their work. Disputing allegations is important, but providing alternative explanations or evidence can be beneficial. Understanding company policies and procedures is vital for avoiding misunderstandings and potential disciplinary actions.
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/2026fwc2636.pdfSend your details to Liquid Employment Lawyers
Liquid Employment Lawyers is a paid legal service and our referral partner, not free Fair Work advice. Tell them what has happened and a member of their team will call you back. For free general guidance, use our tools or call the Fair Work Ombudsman on 13 13 94.
Prefer to read first? About Liquid Employment Lawyers · Not sure if you need a lawyer? Read the legal help guides
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. The full FWC and Federal Court library behind every advisor answer is on Pro.
FairWork Mate AI
This is one decision. Pro reads all of them.
Free case pages cite the top 250 decisions. Pro opens the full Fair Work Commission and Federal Court library, cross-references your own situation against it, and cites the decision behind every answer — plus document upload, so it can read your letter or contract line by line. 150 questions a month, cancel anytime.
Just need this week sorted? A 7-Day Pass is 50 questions over 7 days, no account. Get a 7-Day Pass — $14.99
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