Skip to main content
FairWorkMate
FWCFair Work Commission · 30 January 2026

[2026] FWCFB 4

Citation: [2026] FWCFB 4

What happened

Bevan Roberts, an employee, made several applications to the Fair Work Commission, including a general protections application and a stop bullying application. His employment ended on 13 January 2025. Quantum Systems Pty Ltd and others (the respondents) objected to Mr Roberts’ application, arguing he had not been dismissed and therefore the Commission lacked jurisdiction. During a hearing, the respondents withdrew their objection. Mr Roberts then applied for costs, which the Commission dismissed after considering written submissions. Mr Roberts appealed the decision, seeking permission to appeal and to appeal the costs decision.

What was decided

The Full Bench granted permission to appeal but dismissed the appeal. The Commission found the respondents did not act unreasonably in raising the jurisdictional objection, even though they later withdrew it. The Commission considered the circumstances and submissions of both parties before dismissing Mr Roberts’ application for costs. The Full Bench found the Commissioner did not fail to consider relevant factors or err in law.

What it means for employers

Employers should carefully consider the merits of jurisdictional objections before raising them, as withdrawing them late in the process may not automatically excuse a costs order. Acting reasonably and avoiding unnecessary costs is important. It is crucial to ensure all relevant documents and evidence are considered when assessing the viability of a legal position.

What it means for employees

Employees should be aware of their rights to seek costs orders in certain circumstances. However, the Commission will assess whether an objection was reasonably pursued before determining whether costs are appropriate.

unfair-dismissalgeneral-protectionspenalty-ratesmodern-award-variationenterprise-agreementlong-service-leaveparental-leavesexual-harassment

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

https://www.fwc.gov.au/documents/decisionssigned/pdf/2026fwcfb4.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