the Applicant v Giidjaa Projects Pty Ltd
Citation: [2026] FWC 2747
At a glance
- Employees affected
- 1
What happened
the Applicant lodged an unfair dismissal application with the Fair Work Commission on June 22, 2026. He stated he was employed by Giiddaa Projects Pty Ltd from January 20, 2026, and dismissed on June 5, 2026. The Commission found his employment period was approximately four and a half months, falling short of the six-month minimum required for an unfair dismissal claim. Despite multiple attempts to contact the Applicant via email, SMS, and phone calls to address this issue, he did not respond.
What was decided
The Fair Work Commission Deputy President dismissed the Applicant’s unfair dismissal application without a hearing. The decision was made under section 587(1)(c) of the Fair Work Act because the application had no reasonable prospects of success. This was due to the Applicant not meeting the minimum six-month employment period requirement. The Commission attempted to notify him of this and provide an opportunity to respond, but received no reply. The Deputy President noted that dismissing applications early avoids protracted proceedings.
What it means for employers
Employers should ensure accurate record keeping regarding employee start dates and dismissal dates. This is crucial for determining eligibility for unfair dismissal claims. Clear communication with employees about minimum employment periods can also help avoid unnecessary applications.
What it means for employees
Employees must meet the minimum employment period requirement before lodging an unfair dismissal claim. It's important to respond promptly to any correspondence from the Fair Work Commission regarding your application’s eligibility, as failure to do so may result in its dismissal.
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/2026fwc2747.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 →