the Applicant v Endeavour Group Limited
Citation: [2026] FWCFB 153
At a glance
- Employees affected
- 1
What happened
the Applicant appealed a decision made by the Commissioner in April 2026, regarding her unfair dismissal from Endeavour Group Limited. The initial decision found that the Applicant's dismissal was not harsh, unjust or unreasonable due to her incapacity for work and the absence of any return-to-work prospects. The appeal sought permission to challenge this finding, arguing errors in the Commissioner’s approach and failure to consider relevant factors like a return-to-work process.
What was decided
The Fair Work Commission Full Bench refused the Applicant's application for permission to appeal the earlier decision. They found that the Applicant did not present an arguable case of appealable error, as the Commissioner’s approach was considered orthodox and within his discretion based on the evidence presented. The bench also determined that granting permission would not be in the public interest, citing a lack of broader significance or injustice.
What it means for employers
Employers should ensure they follow proper procedures when dismissing employees due to incapacity, including considering reasonable adjustments like return-to-work plans. While dismissal may be justifiable if an employee cannot perform their role and there's no prospect of recovery, documenting the process and exploring alternatives is crucial.
What it means for employees
Employees facing dismissal should carefully review all aspects of the decision and consider seeking legal advice if they believe errors were made or relevant factors were not considered. However, appeals are difficult to succeed with unless a clear error can be demonstrated.
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/2026fwcfb153.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 →