the Applicant v The Marlow Family Trust No3
At a glance
- 1
What happened
the Applicant, a casual kitchen employee at two venues (Kings Park Tavern and Doonside Hotel) operated by The Marlow Family Trust No3, worked regular shifts since August 2024. On November 14, 2025, he received a text message informing him that his shifts were cancelled due to a downturn in business. He responded, inquiring about future availability, but received a message stating no shifts were available. He subsequently applied for unfair dismissal. the Respondent stated he remained eligible for shifts and had an active profile on their rostering system.
What was decided
The Full Bench allowed an appeal against a Deputy President’s decision that the Applicant had not been unfairly dismissed. The Deputy President had found that the Applicant’s hours of work were not contractual terms. The Full Bench considered the decision in *City of Sydney RSL & Community Club Ltd v Balgowan* and determined the question of whether the Applicant had been dismissed. The Full Bench considered whether the Applicant’s employment was terminated on the employer’s initiative, as per s 386(1)(a) of the Fair Work Act. Further evidence was admitted due to the Applicant’s limited English skills and unrepresented status.
What it means for employers
Employers should be cautious about how they communicate changes to casual employees' shifts and availability. While casual employees don't have guaranteed hours, abrupt cancellations and lack of clear communication about future opportunities could be interpreted as a termination of employment, even without a formal dismissal process. Maintaining open communication and demonstrating ongoing eligibility for shifts can help mitigate this risk.
What it means for employees
Even casual employees working regular shifts may be considered unfairly dismissed if their employment is terminated by the employer's actions. Employees should document communication regarding shift availability and any changes to their work arrangements. If shifts are cancelled and future work is uncertain, it's important to seek advice about potential unfair dismissal rights.
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.
Send your details to Liquid Employment Lawyers
Liquid Employment Lawyers is a paid legal service and our referral partner, not free Fair Work advice. FairWork Mate may receive a referral fee from Liquid Legal. Tell them what has happened and a member of their team will call you back. For free general guidance, use our tools or call the Fair Work Ombudsman on 13 13 94.
Prefer to read first? About Liquid Employment Lawyers · Not sure if you need a lawyer? Read the legal help guides
Want 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.
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.
Renews monthly at A$29.99 until you cancel. By continuing you agree to our Terms.
Get notified on new Fair Work cases
Free email alerts when we publish new underpayment decisions, penalty orders, and workplace law updates.