the Applicant v Richemont Australia Pty Limited
Citation: [2026] FWC 291
What happened
the Applicant brought an application for relief from unfair dismissal. He was employed by Richemont Australia Pty Limited. The application concerned an incorrect recording of his working hours, which led to his dismissal. The Commission considered whether there was a valid reason for the dismissal, whether procedural fairness was afforded, and whether the dismissal was harsh.
What was decided
The Fair Work Commission dismissed the Applicant’s application for relief from unfair dismissal. the Commissioner found that Richemont Australia Pty Limited had a valid reason for the dismissal, afforded the Applicant procedural fairness, and that the dismissal was not harsh. The Commission referred to previous cases including *Bartlett, Mark v Ingleburn Bus Services Pty Ltd T/A Interline Bus Services* and *Reseigh, Glenn v Stegbar Pty Ltd T/A Jeld-wen Glass Australia* in reaching this decision.
What it means for employers
Employers should ensure accurate record-keeping of employee working hours. This helps avoid disputes arising from discrepancies. Providing procedural fairness, such as an opportunity to respond to allegations, is crucial even in situations where dismissal is considered.
What it means for employees
Employees should keep their own records of working hours to compare with those provided by their employer. If there are discrepancies, employees should raise these concerns with their employer before dismissal proceedings begin.
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/2026fwc291.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. The full FWC and Federal Court library behind every advisor answer is on Pro.
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.
Just need today sorted? A Day Pass is 25 questions over 24 hours. No account, nothing to cancel.
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