the Applicant v Westpac Banking Corporation
At a glance
- 1
What happened
the Applicant worked as a Home Finance Manager at Westpac Banking Corporation for almost 20 years, from December 2005 to September 2025. He was dismissed after an investigation found he accepted payments from customers without declaring conflicts of interest, did not follow responsible lending practices, and used WhatsApp on his work phone for work activities. The investigation stemmed from prior investigations in 2016, 2019, and 2022 into the Applicant's conduct. Westpac’s Mortgage Origination Investigations Unit (MOIU) had been monitoring his lending practices. He responded to allegations but did not provide evidence regarding improper payments.
What was decided
The Fair Work Commission found that the Applicant was not unfairly dismissed. The Commission considered whether the dismissal was harsh, unjust or unreasonable and concluded it wasn't. While the Applicant was protected from unfair dismissal due to his length of service and coverage by an enterprise agreement, the Commission noted inconsistencies in his responses during the investigation and a failure to provide evidence supporting his claims. Westpac’s actions were deemed reasonable given the seriousness of the allegations.
What it means for employers
Employers should ensure thorough investigations are conducted when serious misconduct is alleged, including providing employees with opportunities to respond and access relevant information. Maintaining records of communication and responses is crucial. Consistent application of workplace policies and procedures is important for fairness and legal defensibility.
What it means for employees
Employees facing disciplinary action have the right to respond to allegations and seek support. However, failing to provide adequate evidence or demonstrating inconsistencies in statements can weaken a claim of unfair dismissal. Understanding company policies regarding communication tools like WhatsApp is essential.
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.
Send your details to Liquid Employment Lawyers
Liquid Employment Lawyers is a paid legal service and our referral partner, not free Fair Work advice. FairWork Mate may receive a referral fee from Liquid Legal. 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.
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.
Renews monthly at A$29.99 until you cancel. By continuing you agree to our Terms.
Get notified on new Fair Work cases
Free email alerts when we publish new underpayment decisions, penalty orders, and workplace law updates.