the Applicant v Complete Traffic Services (Vic) Pty Ltd Trading AS Construction Contract Labour Traffic
Citation: [2026] FWC 3012
What happened
the Applicant lodged an unfair dismissal application with the Fair Work Commission against Complete Traffic Services (Vic) Pty Ltd, trading as Construction Contract Labour Traffic. The application was filed 32 days late. the Applicant claimed he was made redundant and subsequently dismissed. He attributed the delay to ignorance of his rights, waiting for more shifts, medical issues, and a perceived threat from the Respondent that he would be barred from future work if he pursued action. the Respondent argued the dismissal was due to redundancy.
What was decided
The Fair Work Commission has dismissed the Applicant’s application for an extension of time to file his unfair dismissal claim. the Commissioner found the reasons provided by the Applicant did not constitute exceptional circumstances, which are required for a late application to be considered. While some factors weighed slightly in favour of granting an extension, such as attempting to dispute the dismissal and lack of prejudice to the Respondent, the significant delay was not justified. The Commission noted that the merits of the underlying unfair dismissal claim remain untested.
What it means for employers
Employers should ensure employees understand their rights regarding termination and have access to information about Fair Work processes. Providing clear communication during redundancy situations is crucial. A perceived threat against an employee pursuing legal action could be viewed negatively by the Commission, even if not directly proven to cause delay.
What it means for employees
Employees must file unfair dismissal applications within strict time limits (usually 21 days). Seeking advice promptly after a dismissal is essential. While ignorance of the law can be considered, it's unlikely to excuse significant delays. Employees should document any attempts to resolve issues before lodging an application.
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/2026fwc3012.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 →