the Applicant v Programmed Maintenance Services Limited
Citation: [2026] FWC 2836
At a glance
- Employees affected
- 1
What happened
the Applicant lodged an unfair dismissal application with the Fair Work Commission on June 23, 2026. The application was not made in accordance with the Fair Work Act because the required fee wasn’t paid or a waiver obtained. The Commission repeatedly notified the Applicant about the outstanding fee and provided opportunities to rectify it through phone calls, SMS messages, and emails, including a warning that dismissal was likely if the fee wasn’t paid or a completed waiver form submitted. Despite these reminders, she did not respond.
What was decided
The Fair Work Commission dismissed the Applicant's unfair dismissal application under section 587(1)(a) of the Fair Work Act 2009. The Deputy President found the Applicant had been given sufficient opportunity to address the outstanding fee but failed to do so. As such, the application was dismissed without further consideration. 'The Applicant has been given ample opportunity to rectify the outstanding Application fee; however, the Commission’s enquiries and warnings have been disregarded.'
What it means for employers
Employers should ensure employees are aware of any fees associated with Fair Work applications and understand the process for seeking waivers. This decision highlights the importance of following procedural requirements when lodging claims.
What it means for employees
Employees need to be mindful of application fees and waiver processes when lodging a claim with the Fair Work Commission. Failure to address outstanding fees can lead to dismissal of the application, even if there are valid grounds for the original complaint.
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/2026fwc2836.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 →