Application by Muntuza Consult Pty Ltd Trading AS Perth Healthcare and Support Enterprise
Citation: [2026] FWC 3122
At a glance
- Employees affected
- 3
What happened
Muntuza Consult Pty Ltd, trading as Perth Healthcare and Support Enterprise, applied to the Fair Work Commission to reduce redundancy payments owed to three former employees: Debra Boualleg, Bronwyn Meecham, and Renae Smith. The company cited financial difficulties, including voluntary administration and debt, as the reason for seeking a reduction to nil. The employees objected, citing their length of service, contributions, and the financial hardship a reduced payment would cause. Muntuza supports around 85 individuals with disability support needs and has approximately 38 employees.
What was decided
The Fair Work Commission dismissed Muntuza Consult Pty Ltd’s application to vary its redundancy pay obligations. The Commissioner found that Muntuza did not satisfy the requirements under section 120(1)(b)(ii) of the Fair Work Act 2009, which relates to an employer’s incapacity to pay. The Commission stated the onus of proof lies with the employer to demonstrate this inability. The employees will receive the full redundancy payments as outlined in the Fair Work Act.
What it means for employers
Employers seeking to reduce redundancy payments due to financial hardship must demonstrate a clear and convincing inability to pay. Simply experiencing financial difficulties is not enough. They need to provide robust evidence to support their claim. Failing to consult with the Applicant regarding potential redundancies can also negatively impact such applications.
What it means for employees
The Applicant are entitled to full redundancy payments as stipulated by the Fair Work Act if their employment is terminated due to the Respondent no longer requiring their role. The Applicant should document their contributions and any relevant circumstances, such as financial hardship, if contesting a reduction in redundancy pay.
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/2026fwc3122.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