the Applicant v Australian Football League
Citation: [2026] FWCFB 190
At a glance
- Employees affected
- 1
What happened
the Applicant was dismissed from his role as Elite Umpires Coach and Administrator at the Australian Football League (AFL) following an altercation with a member of the public, Mr CS, at North Sydney Oval on April 8, 2025. During this incident, the Applicant attempted to prevent Mr CS from running laps on a field reserved for AFL umpire training. The incident escalated into physical contact, involving the Applicant grabbing and pushing Mr CS. An internal investigation followed, leading to allegations of offensive language and threatening behaviour against the Applicant. He was stood down with pay and subsequently terminated.
What was decided
The Fair Work Commission Full Bench dismissed the Applicant’s appeal against a previous decision that found his dismissal was not harsh, unjust or unreasonable. The Deputy President had initially accepted the Applicant's version of events in some aspects but noted he often minimised the severity of his actions. The Full Bench agreed with the original decision and did not find any error in how the Deputy President considered the circumstances surrounding the incident, including potential provocation or self-defence. Permission to appeal was initially granted, but ultimately denied.
What it means for employers
Employers should ensure thorough investigations are conducted when allegations of misconduct arise, considering all available evidence like CCTV footage. It’s important to provide employees with an opportunity to respond to allegations and consider any mitigating factors presented. Maintaining consistent standards of conduct is crucial, and documenting the process clearly helps defend decisions.
What it means for employees
Employees have a right to be treated fairly during disciplinary processes, including being given a chance to respond to allegations. However, honesty and accuracy in recounting events are vital; minimising or misrepresenting actions can undermine any potential defence. Understanding workplace policies regarding conduct is also important.
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/2026fwcfb190.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 →