the Applicant v Ertech Pty Ltd
Citation: [2026] FWC 3052
At a glance
- Employees affected
- 1
What happened
the Applicant was verbally dismissed by Ertech Pty Ltd on April 8, 2026, following allegations of misconduct. A written confirmation of dismissal followed on April 9, 2026, with a notice period payout. the Applicant lodged an unfair dismissal application on May 1, 2026, one day past the statutory 21-day limit. He sought advice from a law firm regarding the deadline but later realised he provided an incorrect dismissal date.
What was decided
The Fair Work Commission dismissed the Applicant’s application for an extension of time to file his unfair dismissal claim. The Commissioner found no exceptional circumstances warranted extending the 21-day timeframe. While the Applicant had an arguable case, factors like the lack of a valid reason for the delay and his awareness of the dismissal weighed against granting an extension.
What it means for employers
Employers should ensure employees are clearly informed about their termination date and reasons for dismissal to avoid misunderstandings that could lead to delayed applications. Accurate record-keeping is crucial, as is clear communication regarding timelines and processes.
What it means for employees
Employees must be mindful of strict time limits when lodging unfair dismissal claims. Seeking legal advice is helpful but verifying information received from advisors with official documentation is essential. Any errors in understanding the dismissal date can impact your ability to pursue a claim.
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/2026fwc3052.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 →