Skip to main content
FWCFair Work Commission · 2026

the Applicant v New Horizons Enterprises Limited

Citation: [2026] FWC 3034

At a glance

Employees affected
1

What happened

the Applicant commenced an unfair dismissal application against New Horizons Enterprises Limited in April 2026. Several attempts were made to schedule a conciliation conference, including notices via email and SMS reminders. the Applicant requested an adjournment of the initial conference on May 19, 2026, which was granted. A second conference was scheduled for June 16, 2026, but the Applicant did not attend and made no contact with the Commission regarding her absence. Further emails and SMS reminders were sent to the Applicant, again warning of potential dismissal if she failed to respond. She still didn't respond.

What was decided

The Fair Work Commission dismissed the Applicant’s unfair dismissal application under section 587(3)(a) of the Fair Work Act. the Deputy President found the Applicant had stopped pursuing her claim due to her failure to attend the conciliation conference and lack of communication with the Commission. The Commission is permitted to dismiss applications where an applicant has ceased participating in proceedings, provided procedural fairness is observed. the Applicant was given multiple opportunities to respond before dismissal.

What it means for employers

Employers should ensure they follow proper procedures when dealing with employee claims, including providing adequate notice and opportunity for response. This case highlights the importance of maintaining records of communication attempts and adhering to Fair Work Act provisions regarding applications that are not pursued by the applicant.

What it means for employees

Employees who lodge a claim with the Fair Work Commission must actively participate in the process, attending scheduled conferences or requesting adjournments appropriately. Failure to do so can result in the dismissal of their application, even if they initially had a valid concern.

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.

unfair-dismissalgeneral-protectionsredency

Every statement above is drawn from the published decision. Read the original here:

https://www.fwc.gov.au/documents/decisionssigned/pdf/2026fwc3034.pdf

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.

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 this week sorted? A 7-Day Pass is 50 questions over 7 days, no account. Get a 7-Day Pass — $14.99

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

All cases