Skip to main content
FairWorkMate
FWCFair Work Commission · 17 April 2026

[2026] FWC 515

Citation: [2026] FWC 515

At a glance

Employees affected
1

What happened

Shane Stephens commenced an unfair dismissal claim against Citic Pacific Mining Management Pty Ltd in September 2025, seeking reinstatement. The case involved a drug test failure and concerns about the chain of custody of samples. A hearing was scheduled for February 18, 2026, but Stephens discontinued his claim approximately 37 minutes before the hearing, citing feeling overwhelmed and unprepared. Citic Pacific sought an order for costs due to Stephens’ conduct.

What was decided

The Fair Work Commission Deputy President Easton dismissed Stephens’ claim and declined to order him to pay Citic Pacific’s costs. While acknowledging Stephens’ unreasonable conduct, including late responses and a last-minute discontinuation, the Commission found that these actions did not demonstrably cause Citic Pacific to incur unnecessary costs. The Commission noted Stephens’ late filing of evidence suggested he intended to proceed with the case until shortly before the hearing.

What it means for employers

Employers should maintain thorough documentation of dismissal processes, particularly regarding drug and alcohol testing, to defend against claims of unfairness. Prompt and clear communication with employees regarding the status of a claim is crucial to avoid unnecessary costs associated with preparing for hearings.

What it means for employees

Employees considering unfair dismissal claims should be fully prepared for hearings and communicate promptly with the Commission and the employer. Last-minute discontinuance can be viewed unfavourably and may result in cost orders.

unfair-dismissalgeneral-protectionspenalty-ratesmodern-award-variationcosts

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

https://www.fwc.gov.au/documents/decisionssigned/pdf/2026fwc515.pdf

Want more cases like this?

FairWork Mate tracks Fair Work Ombudsman, Fair Work Commission and Federal Court decisions across Australia. The full dataset, with structured fields for awards cited, industry, penalty amounts and affected employee counts, is available through the Business API. FairWork Mate AI answers plain-English questions grounded on the full corpus.

Individual case summaries on this site are free. API + AI access is a paid product. Contact us for pricing or a 50% off first month.

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 by AI 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