the Applicant v Kiriwake Pty Ltd.
Citation: [2026] FWC 3095
At a glance
- Employees affected
- 1
What happened
the Applicant sought an unfair dismissal remedy under the Fair Work Act. He claimed dismissal occurred on February 1, 2026, with notification on April 15, 2026. Kiriwake Pty Ltd, represented by the Respondent, disputed this, presenting a letter from May 2026 proposing termination based on fitness for work and offering compensation. the Applicant responded in May, indicating he would reply the following week. the Applicant maintained he was told on April 15 he no longer had a job.
What was decided
The Fair Work Commission dismissed the Applicant’s unfair dismissal application. Deputy President Colman found the Applicant was not dismissed at the time he lodged the application. Correspondence showed he was still employed. The Commission ruled the Applicant lacked ‘standing’ to make the application because he had not been dismissed. The Deputy President preferred the account of the Respondent, which aligned with the documentary evidence.
What it means for employers
Employers should maintain clear and documented communication regarding employment changes. A formal offer of termination with compensation, even if not accepted immediately, can impact the timing of a dismissal claim. Ensure accurate record-keeping of all correspondence and actions related to employee departures.
What it means for employees
An employee is not considered dismissed until the employer has taken definitive action to end their employment. A proposal for termination, even with compensation offered, does not constitute dismissal. Understand the legal definition of dismissal when considering an unfair dismissal 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/2026fwc3095.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