the Applicant v Grampians Health
Citation: [2026] FWCFB 209
What happened
the Applicant appealed a Fair Work Commission decision that dismissed his unfair dismissal claim against Grampians Health. The initial decision found the Applicant was fairly dismissed after he used his vehicle to transport a patient while under the influence of medical cannabis, following a direction from his employer. This direction was given after a medical examination revealed his cannabis use. the Applicant argued he was denied procedural fairness and disagreed with the factual findings and evaluation of evidence.
What was decided
The Fair Work Commission Full Bench refused the Applicant’s appeal against the earlier decision. The Full Bench found there was no arguable error in the original Commissioner’s decision. They noted the Applicant had a fair opportunity to present his case and that the Commissioner’s findings were not demonstrably wrong. The bench also stated that the appeal did not raise a matter of public interest sufficient to grant permission to appeal.
What it means for employers
Employers can enforce reasonable directions, even if they impact an employee's circumstances. It's important to ensure employees understand and acknowledge the seriousness of their conduct, especially when it relates to safety. Employers should document reasons for dismissal and provide opportunities for employees to respond.
What it means for employees
Employees must follow lawful and reasonable directions from their employer. Disregarding such directions, particularly those related to safety, can lead to dismissal. Employees have the right to a fair process, but disagreement with a decision does not automatically mean procedural fairness was denied.
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/2026fwcfb209.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