the Applicant v Prospa Advance Pty Ltd
At a glance
- 1
- MA000019, MA000020
What happened
the Applicant was employed by Prospa Advance Pty Ltd as a Senior Security Engineer – Operations and Response, later promoted to Security Operations and Response Lead. In September 2025, he was dismissed due to redundancy following a restructure. the Applicant alleges the dismissal was unfair, arguing Prospa didn't properly consult him and the dismissal wasn't a genuine redundancy. He also raised concerns about workplace conduct involving a colleague, a co-worker, which he reported to his manager, a manager. Prospa contends the Applicant wasn't protected from unfair dismissal and the redundancy was genuine.
What was decided
The Fair Work Commission found the Applicant was protected from unfair dismissal because he was covered by a modern award. The Commission determined Prospa did not properly consult the Applicant regarding the redundancy and it wasn't a genuine redundancy. The dismissal was deemed unreasonable. Reinstatement was not appropriate due to a loss of trust, and the Applicant was awarded two months’ compensation. The Commission rejected Prospa’s argument that the Applicant was not protected from unfair dismissal.
What it means for employers
Employers must adhere to consultation obligations outlined in modern awards when considering redundancies. Failing to consult properly can render a redundancy a non-genuine one, leading to unfair dismissal claims. Employers should ensure thorough investigations into workplace complaints are conducted and address employee concerns appropriately.
What it means for employees
Employees covered by modern awards are protected from unfair dismissal. If an employer fails to follow award consultation requirements during a redundancy process, an employee may have grounds for an unfair dismissal claim. Employees should document any workplace concerns and report them through appropriate channels.
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.