the Applicant v Liqui Moly Australia Pty Limited
At a glance
- 1
What happened
the Applicant was employed as a Field Sales Representative for Liqui Moly Australia Pty Ltd starting in July 2025, reporting to the Respondent. She raised concerns about the Respondent’s management style with the Managing Director and CEO, in approximately seven conversations. Following a formal complaint from the Applicant regarding the Respondent’s conduct, a meeting was held on February 27, 2026, where issues were discussed. Subsequently, the Respondent visited Perth in March 2026, during which the Applicant claims to have worked extended hours and experienced increased stress, leading to medical treatment. She resigned and applied to the Fair Work Commission for a remedy.
What was decided
The Fair Work Commission determined that the Applicant’s resignation was not a dismissal under section 386 of the Fair Work Act 2009. The Commission upheld Liqui Moly's jurisdictional objection, stating that because she did not experience a dismissal, her application could not proceed. the Commissioner found that while the Applicant raised concerns with the Managing Director and CEO, these were discussed and addressed during meetings. The application was subsequently dismissed.
What it means for employers
Employers should ensure clear communication channels exist for employees to raise workplace concerns without fear of reprisal. Addressing employee complaints promptly and effectively is crucial. Failing to do so can lead to misunderstandings and potentially legal action, even if the employee ultimately resigns rather than being formally dismissed.
What it means for employees
Employees who experience issues with their employer should document these concerns and attempt to resolve them through internal channels. If resolution isn’t achieved, seeking advice from a union or legal professional is recommended before resigning, as resignation may impact potential claims under the Fair Work Act.
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.