[2026] FWCFB 4
Citation: [2026] FWCFB 4
What happened
the Applicant, 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 the Applicant’s application, arguing he had not been dismissed and therefore the Commission lacked jurisdiction. During a hearing, the respondents withdrew their objection. The Applicant then applied for costs, which the Commission dismissed after considering written submissions. the Applicant 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 the Applicant’s 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.
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/2026fwcfb4.pdfSend your details to Liquid Employment Lawyers
Liquid Employment Lawyers is a paid legal service and our referral partner, not free Fair Work advice. 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.
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 this week sorted? A 7-Day Pass is 50 questions over 7 days, no account. Get a 7-Day Pass — $14.99
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