the Applicant v Camino Alto Pty Ltd
Citation: [2026] FWC 2703
At a glance
- Employees affected
- 1
What happened
the Applicant lodged an unfair dismissal application with the Fair Work Commission on June 19, 2026. She stated she worked for Camino Alto Pty Ltd from January 30, 2026, and was dismissed on June 17, 2026. The Commission advised the Applicant that her employment period was less than six months, making her ineligible to pursue an unfair dismissal claim. Despite multiple attempts by the Commission to contact her, she did not respond.
What was decided
The Fair Work Commission Deputy President O’Neill dismissed the Applicant's unfair dismissal application. The decision was based on the fact that the Applicant had less than six months of employment with Camino Alto Pty Ltd at the time of dismissal. This meant she did not meet the minimum eligibility requirement for an unfair dismissal claim under section 383 of the Fair Work Act. The Commission used its power under section 587 to dismiss the application without considering the fairness of her dismissal.
What it means for employers
Employers should be aware that employees must generally work for at least six months before being eligible to make an unfair dismissal claim. This timeframe is shorter for small business employers. Maintaining accurate employment records is crucial to verify eligibility and respond appropriately to applications.
What it means for employees
Employees need to understand the minimum employment period requirements before lodging an unfair dismissal application. Generally, this is six months but can be 12 months depending on whether the employer is a small business. The Fair Work Commission will assess eligibility early in the process and may dismiss claims that do not meet these requirements.
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/2026fwc2703.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 →