Australian workplace law decisions — 2024
Every published Fair Work Commission, Federal Court, Federal Circuit & Family Court, and Fair Work Ombudsman decision from 2024 in our corpus, in plain English. Sorted by date.
Top topics in 2024
All decisions
← Back to the full corpusthe Applicant v Warramunda Villages
the Applicant brought an application to the Fair Work Commission concerning contraventions involving her dismissal. Warramunda Villages was the respondent. The Deputy President heard the case. The application was ultimately dismissed.
the Applicant v Multicultural Arts Victoria Inc
the Applicant commenced employment with Multicultural Arts Victoria Inc in 2021. She was dismissed in May 2024. the Applicant brought an application to the Fair Work Commission concerning a contravention involving her dismissal. The Commission notes that the decision does not contain detailed facts of the case.
the Applicant v University of New South Wales Trading AS UNSW Sydney & Brooke White
the Applicant brought an application to the Fair Work Commission concerning contraventions involving her dismissal from the University of New South Wales Trading AS UNSW Sydney. the Respondent was also named in the case. The Deputy President heard the application. The document indicates this is a decision [2025] FWC 2378, published on 18 November 2025.
the Applicant v Delfino Paving Co. Pty. Ltd.
the Applicant brought an application to the Fair Work Commission concerning contraventions involving his dismissal. The details of the application and the circumstances leading to his dismissal are not provided in the available text. the Commissioner heard the application.
the Applicant v Studio Figura Aa Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced employment with Studio Figura Aa Pty Ltd, a wellness centre, in a role. The details of the employment and the reasons for the dismissal are not detailed in the provided text. The Fair Work Commission heard the case. Deputy President Lake presided over the matter.
the Applicant v Administrative Review Tribunal
The Fair Work Commission considered an application related to contraventions involving a dismissal. The case involves the Applicant and the Administrative Review Tribunal. Deputy President Boyce and a Deputy President were involved in the decision. The document itself provides limited detail about the specific facts of the case.
the Applicant v SMR Designs Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced employment with SMR Designs Pty Ltd. The company is in the construction industry. the Applicant applied for an unfair dismissal remedy. The Fair Work Commission has not provided details of the events leading to his dismissal.
the Applicant v Plumb Now Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced employment with Plumb Now Pty Ltd. He subsequently filed for an unfair dismissal remedy. The Fair Work Commission considered whether the application had merit. The decision was made by Deputy President Bell.
Application by the Applicant
The Applicant applied to the Fair Work Commission for an order to stop bullying. The application was heard by Commissioner McKinnon. The Commission considered whether the application had reasonable prospects of success. The case relates to the real estate industry.
the Applicant v Giorgio Armani Australia Pty Limited
the Applicant commenced employment with Giorgio Armani Australia Pty Limited. The Fair Work Commission heard an application for an unfair dismissal remedy. The decision was made by the Commissioner and a Deputy President. The case number was U2025/3960.
the Applicant v Bob Jane Corporation Pty Ltd
the Applicant sought an unfair dismissal remedy from Bob Jane Corporation Pty Ltd. The Fair Work Commission, Deputy President Easton, considered whether the application was made in accordance with the Fair Work Act. The application was related to an employment dispute.
the Applicant v Arkhill Industries Pty. Limited
the Applicant brought an application for an unfair dismissal remedy against Arkhill Industries Pty. Limited. The Fair Work Commission considered whether the Applicant had completed the minimum employment period required to bring an unfair dismissal claim.
the Applicant v Equal Care NSW Pty Ltd
the Applicant brought an application for an unfair dismissal remedy against Equal Care NSW Pty Ltd. The Commission found the application had no reasonable prospects of success and dismissed it. Deputy President Easton made the decision.
the Applicant v Hendrickson Asia Pacific Pty Ltd
the Applicant sought a remedy for unfair dismissal from Hendrickson Asia Pacific Pty Ltd. The Fair Work Commission considered whether her application had reasonable prospects of success. The decision notes the application was brought under s.587(1)(c) at the Commission’s initiative.
the Applicant v Lovisa Pty Limited
the Applicant commenced proceedings in the Fair Work Commission concerning a dismissal. The application was filed out of time. the Applicant argued that a representative error led to the late filing, and she sought an extension of time to have her application heard. Lovisa Pty Limited, the respondent, is a retail company.
Application by the Applicant
The Applicant applied to the Fair Work Commission for an order to stop bullying. The specifics of the bullying are not detailed in the provided text. The application was identified as AB2024/174. The decision was made on 30 December 2024.
the Applicant v Probe Group Australia Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced employment with Probe Group Australia Pty Ltd. The Fair Work Commission received an application for an unfair dismissal remedy from the Applicant. The Commission initiated a dismissal under section 587. the Commissioner and Deputy President heard the case.
the Applicant v Sunraysia Residential Services Inc
the Applicant commenced working for Sunraysia Residential Services Inc in 2021. He brought a claim to the Fair Work Commission seeking an extension of time to deal with a general protections dismissal dispute. The Commission notes the Applicant’s application was filed outside the standard time limits.
the Applicant v Concentrix Services Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced employment with Concentrix Services Pty Ltd. The Fair Work Commission considered an application for an unfair dismissal remedy. The Commission found the application had no reasonable prospects of success and was dismissed.
the Applicant v G H Varley Pty Limited
the Applicant commenced proceedings in the Fair Work Commission seeking a remedy for unfair dismissal. G H Varley Pty Limited is the respondent. The Commission found the Applicant’s application was not made in accordance with the Act, and the application fee was not paid or waived. Deputy President Easton dismissed the application.
the Applicant v Pro Spec Group Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced employment with Pro Spec Group Pty Ltd. The company is in the construction industry. The Fair Work Commission received an application to deal with contraventions involving her dismissal. The specifics of the dismissal and the alleged contraventions are not detailed in the provided text.
the Applicant v The Gladstone Aboriginal and Islanders Co-Operative Society Limited
the Applicant brought an application for relief from unfair dismissal. He was dismissed by The Gladstone Aboriginal and Islanders Co-Operative Society Limited. The Commission notes the dismissal was considered in relation to the Small Business Fair Dismissal Code.
the Applicant v Ranstad & Others
the Applicant commenced work with a labour hire company, Ranstad, in 2023. She worked at a client site, a manufacturing facility. the Applicant made an application to the Fair Work Commission concerning contraventions involving her dismissal. The Commission notes that the document is a decision.
the Applicant v Air Affairs Australia Pty Ltd
the Applicant applied to the Fair Work Commission for an unfair dismissal remedy. Air Affairs Australia Pty Ltd is an aviation company. The Commission found the Applicant’s application was not made in accordance with the Fair Work Act.
the Applicant v Civil Labour Hire Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced an application for an unfair dismissal remedy against Civil Labour Hire Pty Ltd. The Commission initiated the application under section 587(1)(c) of the Fair Work Act. The Commission found the application had no reasonable prospects of success.
the Applicant v Collins Transport Group Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced employment with Collins Transport Group Pty Ltd. He brought an application to the Fair Work Commission concerning a dismissal. The Commission considered whether the application was lodged within the required time frame, given the Applicant sought legal advice, contacted his former employer, and made inquiries in a different jurisdiction before lodging with the FWC. Deputy President Anderson heard the case.
the Applicant v Linked Community Services Limited
the Applicant commenced an application for unfair dismissal against Linked Community Services Limited. The matter was listed for a hearing, but the Applicant did not attend. The Commission initiated a dismissal under section 587 of the Fair Work Act, effectively dismissing the application for want of prosecution.
the Applicant v Dai Staff Pty Ltd
the Applicant brought an application to the Fair Work Commission concerning contraventions involving his dismissal from Dai Staff Pty Ltd. The specifics of the dismissal and the alleged contraventions are not detailed in the provided text. the Commissioner heard the application.
the Applicant v Mc Hugh Maxillofacial Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced employment with Mc Hugh Maxillofacial Pty Ltd in 2021. She was dismissed from her role in June 2025. the Applicant brought an unfair dismissal claim. The Fair Work Commission considered whether the dismissal was harsh, unjust, or unreasonable.
the Applicant v FNM Painting And Decorating Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced employment with FNM Painting And Decorating Pty Ltd. The matter concerned an application for an unfair dismissal remedy. The Fair Work Commission was not provided with sufficient information to determine the specific circumstances of the dismissal.
the Applicant v Melbourne Eurotech Pty Ltd As The Trustee For Dbnk Family Trust
the Applicant brought an application to the Fair Work Commission. Melbourne Eurotech Pty Ltd, as trustee for the Dbnk Family Trust, was the Respondent. The Commission found the Applicant’s application was not made in accordance with the Fair Work Act.
the Applicant v ITG Payroll Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced employment with ITG Payroll Pty Ltd. The details of the employment and the reasons for the application are not detailed in the provided text. The Fair Work Commission considered an application to deal with contraventions involving dismissal.
the Applicant v the Respondent
the Applicant commenced work with the Respondent. The Fair Work Commission had to determine whether the Applicant was an employee or an independent contractor. The Commission considered whether his dismissal was harsh, unjust, or unreasonable. The case references previous decisions including Grass, John v NSW Chinese Tennis Association Inc and Bartlett, Mark v Ingleburn Bus Services Pty Ltd.
the Applicant v Translationz Pty Ltd
the Applicant, an employee, brought an application to the Fair Work Commission concerning an unfair dismissal. The details of the dismissal and the events leading up to it are not detailed in the provided text. The decision was made by Deputy President Clancy.
Amaka Ndiwe v BUPA
The Applicant commenced proceedings in the Fair Work Commission seeking an unfair dismissal remedy. The Fair Work Commission record indicates an application fee was not paid or waived. The application was not made in accordance with the Fair Work Act. The Deputy President, Easton DP, considered the matter.
the Applicant v Sunlit Asian Supermarket Brisbane CBD Pty Ltd
the Applicant brought an application to the Fair Work Commission concerning an unfair dismissal. The Commission did not provide details about the circumstances of her dismissal from Sunlit Asian Supermarket Brisbane CBD Pty Ltd. The application concerned whether the time to lodge the application should be extended.
the Applicant v Birdon Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced employment with Birdon Pty Ltd. The Fair Work Commission received an application for an unfair dismissal remedy from the Applicant. Deputy President Wright heard the application. The document details a Fair Work Commission decision, [2025] FWC 3542, regarding this application.
the Applicant v the Respondent
the Applicant sought a remedy for unfair dismissal from the Respondent. The Fair Work Commission considered whether the application had reasonable prospects of success. Deputy President Easton made the decision.
Piper Triffitt v Kmart Australia Limited
The Applicant commenced employment with Kmart Australia Limited. She was dismissed from her position. The Applicant then brought an application to the Fair Work Commission seeking an unfair dismissal remedy. The Commission's decision is recorded as [2025] FWC 3848.
the Applicant v Mediconnect Unit Trust
the Applicant commenced employment with Mediconnect Unit Trust. She applied for an unfair dismissal remedy. The Fair Work Commission noted that the Applicant had not completed the minimum employment period to be eligible for an unfair dismissal claim. the Commissioner considered the application.
the Applicant v The Trustee For The Workplace Access & Safety Trust
the Applicant brought an application for an unfair dismissal remedy against The Trustee For The Workplace Access & Safety Trust. The Fair Work Commission has not provided sufficient detail to summarise the specific events leading to the dismissal.
the Applicant v Richmind WA INC.
the Applicant commenced employment with Richmind WA INC, a disability service provider, in 2021. She was dismissed from her role as a support worker in November 2025. the Applicant brought an unfair dismissal claim to the Fair Work Commission.
the Applicant v Genyser Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced an application for an unfair dismissal remedy. The Fair Work Commission notes that the application fee was not paid or waived, and the application was not made in accordance with the Fair Work Act. Genyser Pty Ltd is the respondent.
the Applicant v Terex Australia Pty Ltd & Ors
the Applicant commenced employment with Terex Australia Pty Ltd in 2019. He was dismissed in 2024. the Applicant applied to the Fair Work Commission seeking orders to deal with contraventions involving his dismissal. The Commission notes that the document available online is incomplete.
the Applicant v A Future Corporation Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced employment with A Future Corporation Pty Ltd. The Fair Work Commission heard an application for an unfair dismissal remedy. The Deputy President considered whether the dismissal complied with the small business fair dismissal code.
the Applicant v MS & EB Real Estate Pty Ltd T/A Belle Property Rochedale
the Applicant commenced employment with MS & EB Real Estate Pty Ltd T/A Belle Property Rochedale. The Fair Work Commission considered whether the Applicant resigned or was dismissed from her position. the Applicant sought to have the matter dealt with under s.365 of the Fair Work Act, relating to contraventions involving dismissal.
the Applicant v PWB Vegetation Management Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced an application for an unfair dismissal remedy against PWB Vegetation Management Pty Ltd. The Fair Work Commission notes that the Respondent did not file a response to the application. The case number is U2025/9687.
the Applicant v SUNCORP STAFF PTY LTD
the Applicant brought an application to the Fair Work Commission. The details of the application are not provided in the text. The case was heard by the Commissioner. The case number is C2025/3977.
Mrs Kristina Krsteva v Eat Grk Penrith Pty Ltd
The Applicant commenced proceedings in the Fair Work Commission concerning an unfair dismissal. The case involved Eat Grk Penrith Pty Ltd. The decision was made on December 16, 2025, and published on December 31, 2024. Commissioner McKinnon and a Commissioner heard the application.
Application by Julie-Anne Peace
Julie-Anne Peace brought an application to the Fair Work Commission. The case number is C2025/7600. The Fair Work Commission has dismissed the application.
the Applicant v Jimbo's Yacht Management Pty Ltd
the Applicant brought an application to the Fair Work Commission for an unfair dismissal remedy. Jimbo's Yacht Management Pty Ltd dismissed him. Deputy President Easton considered the application and found it had no reasonable prospects of success.
the Applicant v Blue Coral Concepts Pty Ltd
the Applicant brought an application for an unfair dismissal remedy against Blue Coral Concepts Pty Ltd. The Fair Work Commission considered whether the application had reasonable prospects of success. Deputy President Easton was involved in the decision.
Application by Cater Care Australia Operations Pty Ltd
Cater Care Australia Operations Pty Ltd applied to the Fair Work Commission to vary a redundancy pay determination. The application relates to an employee’s other employment and the employer’s incapacity to pay. The Fair Work Commission case number is C2025/12803.
the Applicant v True Flow Plumbing & Gas Pty Ltd
the Applicant worked for True Flow Plumbing & Gas Pty Ltd. The Applicant brought an application for an unfair dismissal remedy. The Commission was not provided with any further details regarding the circumstances of the dismissal.
the Applicant v Smart Health Australia
the Applicant commenced proceedings in the Fair Work Commission seeking an unfair dismissal remedy. Smart Health Australia, the respondent, was undergoing voluntary liquidation. The Commission initiated the matter under section 587(1)(c) of the Fair Work Act. The Commission found the application had no reasonable prospects of success.
Ekrem Alija v Embassy Of The Republic Of Kosovo
the Applicant commenced employment with the Embassy of the Republic of Kosovo in 2023. He brought an application to the Fair Work Commission seeking an unfair dismissal remedy. The Commission considered the circumstances of his termination.
Application by Regal Cabinets Pty Ltd
Regal Cabinets Pty Ltd, a building services company, sought to vary a previous decision regarding redundancy pay. The Fair Work Commission initially made a decision, and this application concerned a correction to paragraph 12 of that original decision. the Deputy President heard the application.
the Applicant v Bookkeepers @ Work (WA) Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced proceedings in the Fair Work Commission seeking an unfair dismissal remedy. the Respondent, Bookkeepers @ Work (WA) Pty Ltd, applied to have the application dismissed for want of prosecution. the Applicant had not filed any documents or appeared at any hearings in the matter. The Commission initiated the application for dismissal under section 587 of the Fair Work Act.
the Applicant v Doessel Group Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced employment with Doessel Group Pty Ltd in 2021. The company operates in the construction industry. the Applicant was dismissed in 2024. She applied to the Fair Work Commission for an unfair dismissal remedy. The Commission notes that the Respondent did not appear at the hearing.
Application by the Applicant
The Applicant applied to the Fair Work Commission for an order to stop bullying. The Fair Work Commission is not providing further details about the application, the parties involved, or the circumstances leading to the application. The decision was published on 26 November 2025.
the Applicant v Australia Post
the Applicant commenced an application for an unfair dismissal remedy. The Fair Work Commission considered whether to grant an extension of time for the application. Australia Post was the respondent. the Commissioner heard the case.
Mrs Amy Cook v The Trustee For Tapco Unit Trust
the Applicant applied for an unfair dismissal remedy from The Trustee For Tapco Unit Trust. The Fair Work Commission found her application was not made in accordance with the Fair Work Act, and the application fee was not paid or waived. The Trustee For Tapco Unit Trust is the respondent.
the Applicant v John Normyle Pty Ltd
the Applicant brought an application to the Fair Work Commission concerning her dismissal from John Normyle Pty Ltd. The Commission considered whether the Applicant was dismissed and whether she was an employee of the respondent. The case number is U2025/12474.
Julie Saylor v Wyndham City Council
the Applicant commenced employment with Wyndham City Council in 2019. The Fair Work Commission heard an application concerning contraventions involving her dismissal. the Deputy President Clancy heard the case.
the Applicant v Revive Commercial Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced employment with Revive Commercial Pty Ltd. The Fair Work Commission considered an application for an unfair dismissal remedy. The Commission found the application had no reasonable prospects of success.
Application by Metcash Trading Limited Trading AS Independent Hardware Group
Metcash Trading Limited, trading as Independent Hardware Group, applied to the Fair Work Commission to vary redundancy pay. The application relates to a decision made under s.120 of the Fair Work Act. The Commissioner was considering the application.
the Applicant v Roper Gulf Regional Council
the Applicant brought an unfair dismissal claim against Roper Gulf Regional Council. The Council is a local government body in the Northern Territory. The details of the dismissal and the reasons for the claim are not provided in the text.
Application by Applicant
The Fair Work Commission received an application, identified as AB2025/40, from an applicant seeking an order to stop bullying. The decision was made by Deputy President Dean. The applicant was a Commonwealth employee. The document itself does not detail the specifics of the bullying allegations or the parties involved beyond the applicant and the Fair Work Commission.
the Applicant v Compare The Market Pty Ltd & Auto & General Holdings Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced employment with Compare The Market Pty Ltd, part of Auto & General Holdings Pty Ltd. He brought an application to the Fair Work Commission concerning alleged contraventions involving dismissal. The core issue was whether the Applicant was actually dismissed. the Commissioner had to determine if the application had jurisdiction.
the Applicant v Aris Zinc Group Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced employment with Aris Zinc Group Pty Ltd. The company is involved in zinc processing. the Applicant made an application to the Fair Work Commission seeking a remedy for unfair dismissal. the Deputy President and Commissioner heard the case.
the Applicant v The Trustee For Gammon Family Trust
the Applicant commenced employment with The Trustee For Gammon Family Trust, trading as Gammon Plating, in 2021. She was dismissed in 2023. the Applicant brought an unfair dismissal claim. The Commission notes that the Respondent did not appear.
Ricarda Mellor v Ryco Group Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced employment with Ryco Group Pty Ltd. The Fair Work Commission was asked to deal with contraventions involving a dismissal. the Commissioner heard the application. The case citation is [2025] FWC 1906.
the Applicant v ISS Security Pty Limited
the Applicant commenced employment with ISS Security Pty Limited. He filed a claim for an unfair dismissal remedy. The Fair Work Commission was asked to consider the circumstances of his dismissal.
the Applicant v Swarovski Australia Pty Ltd
the Applicant, an employee of Swarovski Australia Pty Ltd, sought a remedy for unfair dismissal. The Fair Work Commission was asked to consider the circumstances of her dismissal. the Commissioner heard the case.
Application by the Applicant
The Applicant applied to the Fair Work Commission for an order to stop bullying. The application relates to the racing industry. the Commissioner heard the application.
the Applicant v Form Fitness Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced working for Form Fitness Pty Ltd. The Fair Work Commission considered whether the Applicant was dismissed. The case involved jurisdictional objections, meaning the Commission needed to determine if it had the power to hear the application. the Deputy President had to decide if the Applicant’s employment ended in a way that constituted a dismissal for the purposes of the Fair Work Act.
the Applicant v Compass Group Defence Hospitality Services Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced employment with Compass Group Defence Hospitality Services Pty Ltd. The Fair Work Commission received an application for an unfair dismissal remedy. The decision references a previous Fair Work Full Bench decision, [2025] FWCFB 254. The document details the publication of the decision and associated metadata within the Fair Work Commission's Document Management System.
the Applicant v Construction Works Qld Pty Limited
the Applicant commenced proceedings in the Fair Work Commission concerning an unfair dismissal. The matter involved Construction Works Qld Pty Limited. A binding settlement agreement was reached, leading to the dismissal of the Applicant’s application.
Application by the Applicant
The Applicant applied to the Fair Work Commission to deal with contraventions involving a dismissal. The application was filed out of time. Deputy President Bell dismissed the application, finding there were no exceptional circumstances to justify the late filing. The decision references an earlier case, *Appeal by Nulty* ([2011] FWAFB 975).
the Applicant v Elite Netting Pty Ltd T/A Elite Netting
the Applicant commenced employment with Elite Netting Pty Ltd in 2023. The company is involved in the manufacture and installation of bird netting. the Applicant brought an application to the Fair Work Commission concerning contraventions involving his dismissal. Deputy President Lake heard the matter.
Application by the Applicant
The Applicant applied to the Fair Work Commission for an order to stop bullying. The application involved an unnamed respondent in the hospitality industry. the Commissioner heard the application.
the Applicant v The Lash House Newcastle Pty Ltd
the Applicant brought an application to the Fair Work Commission concerning contraventions involving her dismissal from The Lash House Newcastle Pty Ltd. The Commission considered whether the application was lodged within the prescribed time limits. The Lash House Newcastle Pty Ltd is a business operating in the beauty and personal care industry.
the Applicant v The Crown In Right Of The State Of New South Wales
the Applicant commenced employment with The Crown In Right of The State of New South Wales in 2021. The matter concerns an application to deal with a dismissal dispute. The Fair Work Commission notes that the document is a decision, but provides no further details regarding the circumstances of the dismissal.
the Applicant v Falcon Traffic Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced employment with Falcon Traffic Pty Ltd. She brought an application to the Fair Work Commission to deal with contraventions involving dismissal. The Commission had to consider whether to extend the time for the application to be lodged. The application was initially filed outside the standard time limit.
the Applicant v Compass Group Defence Hospitality Services Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced employment with Compass Group Defence Hospitality Services Pty Ltd. The Fair Work Commission heard an application for an unfair dismissal remedy. The decision does not detail the specific reasons for the Applicant’s dismissal.
the Applicant v Goyal Estate Pty Ltd & Mr Nabil Chakelli
the Applicant commenced working for Goyal Estate Pty Ltd and the Respondent. The Fair Work Commission heard an application concerning whether she was dismissed. the Commissioner heard the application.
the Applicant v Passion8 Building Services Pty Ltd
the Applicant brought an application for an unfair dismissal remedy against Passion8 Building Services Pty Ltd. The Fair Work Commission considered whether the application was made in accordance with the Fair Work Act. The application was unsuccessful.
the Applicant v Eva Copper Mine Pty Ltd
the Applicant brought an application to the Fair Work Commission concerning contraventions involving her dismissal. Eva Copper Mine Pty Ltd, the respondent, raised a jurisdictional objection. The Commission considered whether there were exceptional circumstances to extend the time for lodging the application. The application was related to a dismissal.
the Applicant v Recording Oasis Pty Ltd as trustee for Recording Oasis Trust
the Applicant commenced employment with Recording Oasis Pty Ltd as trustee for Recording Oasis Trust. The Fair Work Commission considered an application related to contraventions involving her dismissal. The application also addressed a jurisdictional objection and non-compliance with directions, and a request for summary dismissal of proceedings. the Deputy President heard the matter.
the Applicant v Liverpool City Council & Christie Wilson
the Applicant commenced employment with Liverpool City Council in 2018. She made an application to the Fair Work Commission concerning a contravention involving her dismissal. The Fair Work Commission considered whether Liverpool City Council was a ‘national systems employer’.
the Applicant v Sanbot Australia Pty Ltd
the Applicant brought an application to the Fair Work Commission. Sanbot Australia Pty Ltd was the respondent. The Commission found the application was not made in accordance with the Fair Work Act. The application was dismissed.
the Applicant v the Respondent
the Applicant brought an application for an unfair dismissal remedy against the Respondent. The Fair Work Commission considered whether the application had reasonable prospects of success. The decision was made by the Commissioner and a Deputy President.
the Applicant v Qantas Airways Limited
the Applicant commenced employment with Qantas Airways Limited. The Fair Work Commission received an application to deal with contraventions involving dismissal. The specifics of the application and the nature of the contravention are not detailed in the provided text.
Application by the Applicant
The Fair Work Commission received an application from the Applicant. The application concerned an order to stop bullying at work. The Commission considered whether the application had reasonable prospects of success. Commissioner McKinnon and another Commissioner heard the case. The industry involved was airline operations.
the Applicant v Capricorn Blackwater Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced employment with Capricorn Blackwater Pty Ltd. The Fair Work Commission considered an application for an unfair dismissal remedy. The Commission found the application had no reasonable prospects of success and dismissed it.
the Applicant v Kare Qld Pty Ltd
the Applicant brought an application to the Fair Work Commission concerning contraventions involving dismissal. Kare Qld Pty Ltd, the respondent, objected to the application's jurisdiction, arguing that no dismissal had occurred. The application related to the Applicant’s employment with Kare Qld Pty Ltd.
the Applicant v Oscar Wylee Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced employment with Oscar Wylee Pty Ltd. He subsequently filed an application with the Fair Work Commission. The Fair Work Commission document details a jurisdictional objection raised regarding the timing of the application.
the Applicant v The Car Specialist Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced employment with The Car Specialist Pty Ltd. The details of his employment and the reasons for his dismissal are not detailed in the provided text. The Fair Work Commission considered an application for an unfair dismissal remedy. Deputy President Clancy heard the case.
the Applicant v Perpetual Health And Fitness Industries Pty Ltd
the Applicant brought an application to the Fair Work Commission. The details of the application are not provided in the supplied text. The case involved Perpetual Health And Fitness Industries Pty Ltd. the Commissioner heard the application.
the Applicant v United Personnel Traffic Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced employment with United Personnel Traffic Pty Ltd in 2023. He worked as a traffic controller. the Applicant made an application to the Fair Work Commission seeking an order for an unfair dismissal remedy. The Commission notes that this decision follows an earlier Full Bench decision concerning the same matter.
the Applicant v Sydney Zoo Pty Ltd
the Applicant, an employee of Sydney Zoo Pty Ltd, filed an application for unfair dismissal. The application was lodged outside the standard time limit. The Fair Work Commission considered whether there were exceptional circumstances to justify an extension of time. The case references previous decisions including *Stogiannidis v Victorian Frozen Foods Distributors Pty Ltd* and *Shaw v Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Limited*.
the Applicant v Talice Security Services Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced employment with Talice Security Services Pty Ltd. The Fair Work Commission received an application to deal with contraventions involving his dismissal. the Commissioner heard the case. The Professional Diving Industry (Industrial) Award 2020 was cited.
the Applicant v Ambulance Victoria
the Applicant, an employee of Ambulance Victoria, sought a remedy for an unlawful termination. The Fair Work Commission considered his application. Deputy President Masson and another Deputy President heard the case.
the Applicant v Albury Wodonga Automotive Group Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced proceedings in the Fair Work Commission seeking an unfair dismissal remedy from Albury Wodonga Automotive Group Pty Ltd. The Commission considered whether the Applicant’s application had reasonable prospects of success. The case number was U2025/4258.
the Applicant v RPM Automotive Group Limited & Clive Finkelstein
the Applicant commenced employment with RPM Automotive Group Limited. He brought an application to the Fair Work Commission concerning a dismissal. the Respondent was also named in the case. The Commission considered whether the Applicant was dismissed for the purposes of section 386(1)(a) of the Fair Work Act.
Kris Stoddard v Veolia Recycling & Recovery Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced employment with Veolia Recycling & Recovery Pty Ltd. The Fair Work Commission heard an application for an unfair dismissal remedy. Deputy President Dean heard the case. The document is a decision from the Fair Work Commission.
the Applicant v Meta Healthcare Pty Ltd
the Applicant brought a claim against Meta Healthcare Pty Ltd. The matter concerned whether the Applicant was an employee or a contractor. The Fair Work Commission considered a multi-factorial test to determine his classification. The Commission also examined whether a dismissal occurred and if so, whether it constituted an adverse action.
the Applicant v Albatross Projects Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced employment with Albatross Projects Pty Ltd in 2023. He was dismissed from his role as a labourer in June 2025. the Applicant argued his dismissal was unfair. The Fair Work Commission heard evidence regarding the circumstances of his termination and considered whether it was harsh, unjust or unreasonable.
the Applicant v the Respondent & the Second Respondent & the Third Respondent & the Fourth Respondent
the Applicant commenced employment with C.M Perrett & H.E Perrett & R.J Perrett & T.J Perrett, a family-owned business, in 2021. He was dismissed in 2024. the Applicant brought an application for an unfair dismissal remedy to the Fair Work Commission.
the Applicant v North Homes Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced employment with North Homes Pty Ltd in 2023. The company is a residential building company. the Applicant made a complaint alleging a breach of the Fair Work Act. The Fair Work Commission heard the application.
the Applicant v FUTURA MINING SERVICES PTY LTD
the Applicant commenced proceedings in the Fair Work Commission seeking an unfair dismissal remedy from FUTURA MINING SERVICES PTY LTD. The application was lodged outside of the standard time limit. The Commission notes that the Applicant did not provide sufficient reasons to establish exceptional circumstances justifying the late filing.
Application by the Applicant
the Applicant applied to the Fair Work Commission for an order to stop bullying. The application relates to his employment in the amusement, events and recreation industry. the Deputy President heard the application.
the Applicant v North Sydney Family Doctors Pty Ltd & the Respondent
the Applicant brought an application to the Fair Work Commission. The details of the application are not provided in the supplied text. the Deputy President heard the application. The case number is C2025/9193.
Application by Jade Bonney
The Applicant applied to the Fair Work Commission for an order to stop bullying. The Commission, consisting of the Commissioner, heard the application. The specific details of the bullying allegations are not provided in the available text.
the Applicant v Designer Life (Queensland) Pty Ltd As Trustee For The Designer Life (Queensland) Trust
the Applicant commenced employment with Designer Life (Queensland) Pty Ltd, a direct sales company. She brought a claim to the Fair Work Commission alleging unfair dismissal. The company argued that the Applicant resigned, not that she was dismissed. the Commissioner found that the Applicant’s resignation was effectively forced by the company’s conduct, meaning a dismissal occurred. The case involved a jurisdictional objection raised by the Respondent.
The Applicant v The Trustee For Hunter Poultry Trust
The Applicant brought an application before the Fair Work Commission. The Trustee For Hunter Poultry Trust is a poultry company. The Commission initiated the application to deal with contraventions involving a dismissal under section 587(1)(a) of the Fair Work Act. The decision was made by the Commissioner and Deputy President [O'NEILL].
the Applicant v Brighte Capital Pty Ltd
the Applicant brought an application to the Fair Work Commission concerning contraventions involving her dismissal from Brighte Capital Pty Ltd. The details of the events leading to the application are not provided in the available text. The case was heard by a Deputy President and a Cross Deputy President.
the Applicant v Tropical Almond Developments (Ptc) Ltd
the Applicant brought an application to the Fair Work Commission concerning a dismissal. Tropical Almond Developments (Ptc) Ltd was the respondent. The application related to a dispute about general protections, specifically whether an extension of time should be allowed for the application. the Commissioner heard the case.
the Applicant v DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
the Applicant commenced employment with the Department of Health in 2023. She made a complaint alleging adverse action, specifically that her employment was terminated because she raised concerns about workplace issues. The Fair Work Commission considered whether the Department contravened the Fair Work Act.
the Applicant v Poultry Enterprises NSW Pty Limited
the Applicant was employed by Poultry Enterprises NSW Pty Limited. The company directed him to undertake a drug test due to concerns about drug use in the workplace. the Applicant refused to take the test and was subsequently dismissed. He then brought an unfair dismissal claim.
the Applicant v Festoon Lighting Australia Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced employment with Festoon Lighting Australia Pty Ltd. The details of her employment and the reasons for its termination are not detailed in the provided text. The Fair Work Commission considered an application relating to contraventions involving dismissal. the Deputy President Boyce heard the case.
the Applicant v AGUNITY PTY LTD
the Applicant brought an application for an unfair dismissal remedy against AGUNITY PTY LTD. The Deputy President considered whether the dismissal was unfair, noting that the company failed to comply with consultation obligations related to a genuine redundancy. The case number is U2025/2556.
the Applicant v Australian Football League
the Applicant commenced working for the Australian Football League (AFL) in 2018. He was employed as a venue operations coordinator. In November 2023, the AFL terminated his employment. the Applicant brought an unfair dismissal claim.
the Applicant v Davis Made Building Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced employment with Davis Made Building Pty Ltd. The Fair Work Commission heard an application for an unfair dismissal remedy. the Commissioner and Deputy President O’Neill presided over the case. The document includes metadata and publication details related to the decision.
the Applicant v Glenbourne Investments Pty. Ltd.
the Applicant commenced employment with Glenbourne Investments Pty. Ltd. in 2021. The company operates in the hospitality industry. the Applicant was dismissed from his position in November 2025. He subsequently brought an application to the Fair Work Commission seeking an order for unfair dismissal. the Deputy President heard the application.
the Applicant v Battery Services Australia Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced employment with Battery Services Australia Pty Ltd. The Fair Work Commission heard an application for an unfair dismissal remedy. the Deputy President, Lake DP, considered the matter.
the Applicant v The Trustee For The Joseph Family Trust
the Applicant commenced proceedings in the Fair Work Commission. The Trustee For The Joseph Family Trust raised a jurisdictional objection, arguing the Applicant was not dismissed. the Applicant sought to deal with contraventions involving a dismissal. The Commission considered whether the Applicant was dismissed.
the Applicant v Green Light PS Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced employment with Green Light PS Pty Ltd in 2023. The company is in the security industry. the Applicant made a complaint about a workplace matter. Following this, he was dismissed from his role. He subsequently brought an application to the Fair Work Commission.
the Applicant v Actron Engineering Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced employment with Actron Engineering Pty Ltd in 2021. He was dismissed from his role in October 2025. the Applicant brought an application to the Fair Work Commission seeking an order for unfair dismissal. The Commission notes that the Applicant was not represented.
the Applicant v Weldon Children's Services
the Applicant commenced employment with Weldon Children's Services. The Fair Work Commission heard an application concerning contraventions involving her dismissal. the Deputy President and a Cross Deputy President were involved in the decision.
the Applicant v G R & D M Wilkie Pty. Ltd.
the Applicant sought an extension of time to file an unfair dismissal application. The Fair Work Commission considered whether exceptional circumstances existed to justify the extension. G R & D M Wilkie Pty. Ltd. is the respondent. The Deputy President made the decision.
the Applicant v the Respondent (Restaurant Manager), McDonald's
the Applicant commenced proceedings in the Fair Work Commission seeking an unfair dismissal remedy from McDonald’s. The Respondent was the restaurant manager. The Commission initiated the dismissal under section 587(1)(c) of the Fair Work Act. The Commission found the application had no reasonable prospects of success.
the Applicant v Services Australia Trading AS Centrelink
the Applicant commenced employment with Services Australia Trading AS Centrelink. The Fair Work Commission received an application for an unfair dismissal remedy. The document indicates the application was dismissed.
Application by the Applicant
The Applicant applied to the Fair Work Commission for an order to stop bullying. The application was made after the person previously managing the applicant was no longer in that role. The Commission considered whether there was a risk the Applicant would continue to be bullied at work and whether it was appropriate to deal with future risk.
the Applicant v RACQ Operations Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced employment with RACQ Operations Pty Ltd. She brought an application to the Fair Work Commission concerning costs under sections 611 and 375B, related to a s.365 application. The Commission considered whether RACQ engaged in unreasonable conduct and whether costs were incurred unnecessarily.
Sovanna Suy v The Trustee For KS Trust
the Applicant brought an application to the Fair Work Commission seeking an unfair dismissal remedy. The Trustee For KS Trust was the respondent. The Commission considered whether the application was lodged out of time and, if so, whether exceptional circumstances existed to justify an extension of time. The decision does not detail the circumstances of the dismissal itself.
the Applicant v Snodale Group Pty Ltd
the Applicant sought an unfair dismissal remedy from the Fair Work Commission. Snodale Group Pty Ltd is the respondent. The Deputy President Easton dismissed the application because the application fee was not paid or waived, and the application was not made in accordance with the Fair Work Act. The decision references a previous case, Mr Alan Geoffrey Bond v Carbridge Pty Ltd.
the Applicant v Department of Parliamentary Services
the Applicant commenced employment with the Department of Parliamentary Services. The Fair Work Commission dealt with an application involving his dismissal. the Commissioner heard the case. The document details a Fair Work Commission decision, but the specifics of the case, including the reasons for dismissal and any claims made by the Applicant, are not detailed in the provided text.
the Applicant v the Respondent & Vistage Australia Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced employment with Vistage Australia Pty Ltd, trading as Vistage, in 2023. He made an application to the Fair Work Commission concerning a dismissal. The application was filed out of time. the Applicant argued he experienced a medical condition that prevented him from lodging the application sooner. the Respondent, representing Vistage, appeared. the Commissioner considered whether to grant an extension of time.
the Applicant v Craigslea Kindergarten & Preschool Association Incorporated
the Applicant commenced employment with Craigslea Kindergarten & Preschool Association Incorporated. The Fair Work Commission did not provide details about the nature of her role or the reasons for her dismissal. The decision references other cases involving Craigslea Kindergarten & Preschool Association Incorporated: a co-worker, another co-worker, and a co-worker. the Commissioner heard the application.
the Applicant v the Respondent & Qpuzzles Pty Ltd
the Applicant made an application to the Fair Work Commission concerning contraventions involving dismissal. the Respondent and Qpuzzles Pty Ltd were the respondents. The application was challenged on jurisdictional grounds, specifically regarding the time limit for lodging the application. The Commission considered whether exceptional circumstances existed to justify extending the time limit.
the Applicant v HungryPanda Sydney Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced working for HungryPanda Sydney Pty Ltd. The Fair Work Commission initiated a dismissal under section 587 because the Applicant did not attend a scheduled hearing. The Commission noted that the Applicant was not present and did not provide a reasonable explanation for his absence.
the Applicant v Westpac
the Applicant, an employee of Westpac, sought a remedy for unfair dismissal. The Fair Work Commission was asked to consider the circumstances of her dismissal. The decision references several previous cases concerning similar issues, including Bupa Aged Care Australia Pty Ltd T/A Bupa Aged Care Mosman v Tavassoli, Shahin and Woolworths Limited v Lin, Yu Duo (Lynda).
the Applicant v Precision Phone Pty Ltd
the Applicant brought an application for an unfair dismissal remedy against Precision Phone Pty Ltd. The Commission found the application had no reasonable prospects of success and dismissed it. The company was in voluntary liquidation. the Applicant’s dismissal occurred under section 587(1)(c) of the Fair Work Act, which relates to dismissals initiated by the Commission.
the Applicant v Alsco Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced employment with Alsco Pty Ltd, a laundry services company, in 2023. He was dismissed from his position. the Applicant then brought an application to the Fair Work Commission seeking an unfair dismissal remedy. the Deputy President heard the case.
the Applicant v Metro Tasmania Pty Ltd
the Applicant brought an application to the Fair Work Commission concerning contraventions involving her dismissal from Metro Tasmania Pty Ltd. The specifics of the dismissal and the alleged contraventions are not detailed in the provided text. The case was heard by the Commissioner.
the Applicant v the Respondent & the Second Respondent, Trading As Apac Digital Dentistry & Laboratory
the Applicant commenced employment with Apac Digital Dentistry & Laboratory in 2023. He was dismissed from his position. the Applicant then brought an application to the Fair Work Commission seeking a remedy for unfair dismissal. The Commission notes that this application is linked to a previous application under s 394 of the Fair Work Act.
the Applicant v MNI Electrospark All Trades Services Pty Limited & Downer Edi Limited
the Applicant brought an application to the Fair Work Commission. He sought to deal with a general protections dismissal dispute. The Commission considered whether to allow an extension of time for his application. MNI Electrospark All Trades Services Pty Limited and Downer Edi Limited were the respondents.
the Applicant v Australian Nursing Home Foundation Limited
the Applicant commenced employment with Australian Nursing Home Foundation Limited in 2023. She was dismissed from her role as an Enrolled Nurse. the Applicant brought an application to the Fair Work Commission seeking an unfair dismissal remedy. the Deputy President heard the application.
the Applicant v Charles Services Pty Ltd
the Applicant brought an application for an unfair dismissal remedy against Charles Services Pty Ltd. The Commission considered whether the application had reasonable prospects of success. Deputy President Easton was involved in the decision.
the Applicant v Alpha Flight Services Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced employment with Alpha Flight Services Pty Ltd. The Fair Work Commission document indicates this is an application to deal with contraventions involving dismissal, identified as C2025/1228. The document itself is a PDF and contains limited information beyond metadata. The decision date is 31 December 2024.
the Applicant v Wedgetail Roof Racks
the Applicant commenced employment with Wedgetail Roof Racks. He subsequently filed an application for an unfair dismissal remedy. The Fair Work Commission considered the application. The Commission was initiated under section 587(1)(c) of the Fair Work Act.
the Applicant v Malex Facial Aesthetics Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced employment with Malex Facial Aesthetics Pty Ltd. the Deputy President heard an application to deal with contraventions involving dismissal. The decision was made on December 1, 2025.
the Applicant v Disability Talk Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced proceedings in the Fair Work Commission seeking an unfair dismissal remedy from Disability Talk Pty Ltd. She filed her application 40 days after the relevant date. The Fair Work Commission’s rules generally require applications to be filed within 21 days, with extensions possible in limited circumstances. the Applicant did not seek an extension of time.
the Applicant v Mornington Peninsula Living Pty Ltd
the Applicant brought an application for an unfair dismissal remedy against Mornington Peninsula Living Pty Ltd. The Fair Work Commission considered the application. the Deputy President heard the case.
The Applicant v The Brew Testament
The Applicant brought an application to the Fair Work Commission concerning contraventions involving his dismissal from The Brew Testament. The details of the events leading to his dismissal are not provided in the available text.
the Applicant v Tumba Takeaway
the Applicant brought an application to the Fair Work Commission concerning contraventions involving her dismissal from Tumba Takeaway. The details of the events leading to the application are not provided in the supplied text.
the Applicant v Splice Agency Pty. Ltd.
the Applicant commenced employment with Splice Agency Pty. Ltd. in 2023. The Fair Work Commission heard an application concerning contraventions involving her dismissal. the Commissioner presided over the case.
the Applicant v Jaylon Industries Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced employment with Jaylon Industries Pty Ltd. The details of his employment and the reason for his dismissal are not detailed in the provided text. The Fair Work Commission heard an application for an unfair dismissal remedy.
the Applicant v P. & C. EXCAVATIONS PTY. LTD.
the Applicant brought an unfair dismissal claim against P. & C. Excavations Pty Ltd. The company is an excavation business. the Applicant was allegedly dismissed from his employment. The Fair Work Commission considered whether the Applicant was dismissed within the meaning of the Fair Work Act and whether he met the minimum employment period to bring a claim.
the Applicant v Vistqual Pty Ltd
the Applicant brought an application to the Fair Work Commission. The details of the application and the parties involved are not provided in the text. The case number is C2025/6885 and the decision number is [2025] FWC 3522.
the Applicant v the Respondent & The Hospitals Contribution Fund Of Australia Ltd
the Applicant brought a general protections application against the Respondent and The Hospitals Contribution Fund of Australia Ltd. He sought to challenge a dismissal. The application was filed significantly out of time, 819 days after the alleged adverse action. the Applicant had previously discontinued a general protections application filed within 21 days of his dismissal. The Commission considered whether there were exceptional circumstances to justify the late filing.
the Applicant v Golding Mining Pty Ltd
the Applicant sought an extension of time to deal with contraventions involving a dismissal. Golding Mining Pty Ltd was the respondent. The Fair Work Commission considered an application under s 365 of the Fair Work Act.
the Applicant v Woods & Co Hospitality Recruitment Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced employment with Woods & Co Hospitality Recruitment Pty Ltd. The Fair Work Commission heard an application for an unfair dismissal remedy. The decision references several other cases and documents, including Stogiannidis, Periklis v Victorian Frozen Foods Distributors Pty Ltd and a four yearly review of modern awards.
the Applicant v CDI Electrics Pty Ltd
the Applicant brought an application to the Fair Work Commission. The application concerned a contravention involving dismissal. The Commission notes the application was made out of time, and an extension of time was not granted. CDI Electrics Pty Ltd, the respondent, is an electrical company.
the Applicant v Laing O'Rourke Australia Construction Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced employment with Laing O’Rourke Australia Construction Pty Ltd. The Deputy President considered an application relating to contraventions involving a dismissal. The case number was C2025/7168.
the Applicant v Ethical Nursing Care Pty Ltd & the Respondent and Another
the Applicant commenced employment with Ethical Nursing Care Pty Ltd. The Fair Work Commission heard an application concerning a general protections dismissal dispute. The case involved the Applicant and Ethical Nursing Care Pty Ltd, along with the Respondent and another person. The Fair Work Commission case number was C2025/9632.
the Applicant v AMES
the Applicant commenced proceedings in the Fair Work Commission seeking to have contraventions of the Fair Work Act addressed. The application was brought outside the standard 21-day time limit. AMES raised a jurisdictional objection, arguing the application was not properly before the Commission due to the delay.
Application by Brodie Eldridge
The Applicant made an application to the Fair Work Commission. The Fair Work Commission did not provide details about the nature of the application. Deputy President Easton, and a Deputy President, considered the application. The application was numbered C2025/564.
the Applicant v University Of New South Wales
the Applicant commenced working for the University of New South Wales in 2021. He was employed as a research fellow. In November 2024, the University terminated his employment. the Applicant brought an unfair dismissal claim to the Fair Work Commission.
the Applicant v Queensland Rail Limited
the Applicant, an employee of Queensland Rail Limited, brought an unfair dismissal claim. The company terminated his employment. The reasons given related to a breach of the Alcohol and Other Drugs Policy and a non-negative drug test, alongside concerns about managing a complex mental health condition in a safety-critical environment. The Fair Work Commission considered arguments about the reasons for termination.
the Applicant v Jaybro Group Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced proceedings in the Fair Work Commission seeking an unfair dismissal remedy. The Commission considered whether the application had reasonable prospects of success. The decision notes the application number is U2025/14273.
the Applicant v Coles Supermarkets Australia Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced employment with Coles Supermarkets Australia Pty Ltd. The Fair Work Commission heard an application for relief from an unfair dismissal. the Applicant was absent from work for a prolonged period. Coles requested medical information from her, which she did not provide. The company subsequently dismissed her.
the Applicant v Epworth Hospital Richmond
the Applicant, an employee, applied to the Fair Work Commission for an unfair dismissal remedy. The application was lodged out of time. the Respondent was Epworth Hospital Richmond. the Commissioner heard the case.
the Applicant v South African Airways Soc Ltd
the Applicant brought an application to the Fair Work Commission concerning contraventions involving her dismissal from South African Airways Soc Ltd. The specifics of the dismissal and the alleged contraventions are not detailed in the provided text. the Commissioner heard the application.
the Applicant v Allcraft Trading Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced employment with Allcraft Trading Pty Ltd. The company is involved in the manufacturing and distribution of kitchen and bathroom cabinets. the Applicant was dismissed from her position. She then applied to the Fair Work Commission seeking an order for unfair dismissal. The Commission notes that the decision is based on limited information available in the provided text.
the Applicant v Yiyun Corporation Pty Ltd
the Applicant sought an unfair dismissal remedy from the Fair Work Commission. The case involved Yiyun Corporation Pty Ltd, which was facing voluntary liquidation. The Commission initiated the application under section 587(1)(c) of the Fair Work Act. the Deputy President and Commissioner O’Neill heard the case.
Mrs Julie Knowles v Life Without Barriers
the Applicant commenced employment with Life Without Barriers in 2023. She was dismissed from her role in June 2024. the Applicant brought an application to the Fair Work Commission seeking an order for unfair dismissal. the Deputy President heard the application.
the Applicant v 233 Victoria Square Hotel Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced employment with 233 Victoria Square Hotel Pty Ltd in 2023. She was dismissed from her role as a casual bartender. the Applicant applied to the Fair Work Commission seeking an unfair dismissal remedy. The Commission heard evidence regarding the circumstances of her dismissal and the reasons provided by the employer.
Application by the Applicant
The Applicant applied to the Fair Work Commission seeking an order to stop bullying. The application was heard before Commissioner McKinnon. The Commission considered whether the application had reasonable prospects of success. The industry involved was seafood processing.
the Applicant v S & A Carpentry Group Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced employment with S & A Carpentry Group Pty Ltd. The Fair Work Commission heard an application for an unfair dismissal remedy. the Commissioner and a Deputy President heard the case. The decision was published on 24 June 2025.
the Applicant v OS MCAP Pty Ltd
the Applicant, an employee, brought an unfair dismissal claim against OS MCAP Pty Ltd. The company issued the Applicant a final written warning. Subsequently, he was dismissed. the Applicant alleged the dismissal was unfair. The Fair Work Commission considered whether the alleged misconduct occurred as claimed by the employer.
Ding Zhang v Xsv Billiards Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced employment with Xsv Billiards Pty Ltd. The Fair Work Commission heard an application for an unfair dismissal remedy. the Commissioner and Deputy President heard the case. The document provides metadata about the decision, including publication date and case number U2025/15394.
the Applicant v Tech Mahindra Limited
the Applicant commenced employment with Tech Mahindra Limited. She subsequently filed an application for an unfair dismissal remedy with the Fair Work Commission. The Commission did not grant her request for an extension of time and dismissed the application.
Application by the Applicant
The Applicant applied to the Fair Work Commission for an order to stop bullying. The application relates to a workplace within the health and welfare services industry. The Commission notes that this is a decision [2025] FWC 3471.
the Applicant v Wg Wodonga Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced proceedings in the Fair Work Commission seeking an unfair dismissal remedy. Wg Wodonga Pty Ltd, the respondent, is a company. The Commission found the application had no reasonable prospects of success and dismissed it. The decision was made by the Commissioner and a Deputy President.
the Applicant v Load & Go Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced employment with Load & Go Pty Ltd. The Fair Work Commission did not provide details about the nature of his role or the reasons for his dismissal. The case concerned an application for an unfair dismissal remedy. the Deputy President and a Cross Deputy President heard the matter.
the Applicant v Bowen Transit Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced employment with Bowen Transit Pty Ltd. The company is a bus operator. She was dismissed from her position. the Applicant sought a remedy for unfair dismissal. The Fair Work Commission heard the application.
the Applicant v Sydney Mini-Crete Seven Hills Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced proceedings in the Fair Work Commission seeking an unfair dismissal remedy. Sydney Mini-Crete Seven Hills Pty Ltd is the respondent. The Commission found the Applicant’s application was not made in accordance with the Act and the application fee was not paid or waived.
the Applicant v Flemington Child Care Co-operative Limited
the Applicant commenced an application for an unfair dismissal remedy. She filed the application out of time. Flemington Child Care Co-operative Limited did not oppose the application but argued it should be dismissed because the Applicant did not establish exceptional circumstances to justify an extension of time. The Fair Work Commission considered whether exceptional circumstances existed to allow the application to proceed.
the Applicant v HSBC Bank Australia Limited
the Applicant brought an application for relief from unfair dismissal. She was employed by HSBC Bank Australia Limited. The application concerned her dismissal related to conduct. The Fair Work Commission was asked to determine if the dismissal was unfair.
the Applicant v Action Workforce Pty Limited
the Applicant commenced employment with Action Workforce Pty Limited, a labour hire company, in 2021. He worked at a construction site for a host employer. the Applicant brought an application to deal with contraventions involving his dismissal. the Commissioner heard the application.
the Applicant v the Respondent & Stanwell Corporation Limited
the Applicant brought an application to the Fair Work Commission concerning a dismissal. The application involved questions about whether she was an employee and whether she had been dismissed. The case also considered the role of labour hire. Stanwell Corporation Limited and the Respondent were the respondents. the Commissioner heard the case.
the Applicant v Ralph Lauren Australia Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced proceedings in the Fair Work Commission seeking to have the Commission deal with a dismissal dispute. Ralph Lauren Australia Pty Ltd was the respondent. The application was filed 276 days out of time. the Applicant did not seek an extension of time to file the application.
Yesenia Alejandra Gonzalez Aravena v Zenpure Cleaning Services
The Applicant brought an application for an unfair dismissal remedy against Zenpure Cleaning Services. The Fair Work Commission considered whether the application had reasonable prospects of success. The Deputy President Easton was involved in the decision.
Application by Showtime Entertainment Group Pty Ltd Trading AS Showtime Entertainment
Showtime Entertainment Group Pty Ltd, trading as Showtime Entertainment, applied to the Fair Work Commission to vary redundancy pay. The details of the application are not provided in the text. The Deputy President heard the application.
Application by Hird
The Applicant commenced an application against Integratedliving Australia Ltd and the Respondent. The application concerned a dismissal and sought to deal with contraventions. The Fair Work Commission notes the application was made outside the statutory time limit and found no exceptional circumstances to justify proceeding. The Commissioner dismissed the application.
the Applicant v Youturn Limited
the Applicant commenced employment with Youturn Limited in 2023. The company provides disability support services. the Applicant made a complaint alleging adverse action following his request for information relating to a workplace matter. Youturn Limited subsequently terminated his employment. The Fair Work Commission heard the case.
the Applicant v John Holland Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced proceedings in the Fair Work Commission. The matter was dismissed under section 587(1)(c) of the Fair Work Act. This occurred because the Applicant did not prosecute the application. the Deputy President, Easton DP, made the decision.
the Applicant v South Western Sydney Hospital
the Applicant was involved in an unfair dismissal application. The Fair Work Commission initiated a dismissal under section 587(1)(c) due to a lack of prosecution of the case. This means the application was terminated because the Applicant did not actively pursue it.
the Applicant v Ai-Media Technologies Limited
the Applicant commenced employment with Ai-Media Technologies Limited in 2019. She was dismissed in December 2023. the Applicant brought an unfair dismissal claim. The Fair Work Commission heard the case.
the Applicant v Fantastic Furniture Pty Limited & Mrs Jodie Buli
the Applicant commenced proceedings in the Fair Work Commission seeking to have a contravention of the Fair Work Act dealt with. He was previously dismissed from his employment with Fantastic Furniture Pty Limited. The application was lodged outside the prescribed 21-day timeframe. the Respondent was also named in the proceedings.
the Applicant v Corporate Travel Management Limited
the Applicant commenced proceedings in the Fair Work Commission concerning an application for an unfair dismissal remedy. Corporate Travel Management Limited was the respondent. The Commission found an objection made out, relating to a genuine redundancy, and subsequently dismissed the application.
the Applicant v Indigo Summit Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced employment with Indigo Summit Pty Ltd. The details of the matter are not provided in the supplied text.
the Applicant v the Respondent & Raymond Charles Godfrey Pty Limited
the Applicant brought a general protections application to the Fair Work Commission. She alleged adverse action related to a workplace matter. The application was filed out of time. Raymond Charles Godfrey Pty Limited, trading as the Second Respondent, contested the application’s timeliness.
the Applicant v Australian Capital Territory
the Applicant commenced employment with the Australian Capital Territory in 2018. She was dismissed in 2023. the Applicant brought an application to the Fair Work Commission concerning contraventions involving her dismissal. The Commission notes that the document provided is a decision, but lacks specific details about the events leading to the dismissal or the nature of the alleged contraventions.
the Applicant v Murrin Murrin Operations Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced employment with Murrin Murrin Operations Pty Ltd in 2017. She worked as a process operator. The company terminated her employment. the Applicant brought an application to the Fair Work Commission concerning a contravention involving her dismissal. the Deputy President Lake heard the application.
the Applicant v Eden Ritchie Recruitment Pty Ltd & Queensland Corrective Services
the Applicant brought a claim against Eden Ritchie Recruitment Pty Ltd and Queensland Corrective Services. The claim related to a casual labour hire arrangement. the Applicant worked for Queensland Corrective Services through Eden Ritchie Recruitment. The Fair Work Commission considered whether the Applicant was dismissed from his casual employment with Eden Ritchie Recruitment.
the Applicant v Safetylyne Pty Ltd
the Applicant, an employee of Safetylyne Pty Ltd, brought an application to the Fair Work Commission. The application concerned contraventions involving his dismissal. The Commission was not provided with sufficient information to determine the specifics of the case, and the document appears to be a metadata record rather than a full decision.
the Applicant v H's On Course Golf Shop
the Applicant brought an application to the Fair Work Commission under section 365 of the Fair Work Act. He sought to deal with contraventions involving a dismissal. The Fair Work Commission heard that the Applicant was not an employee of H's On Course Golf Shop.
the Applicant v Certified Autos Pty. Ltd. & the Respondent and Another
the Applicant commenced proceedings in the Fair Work Commission. He sought to have a contravention of the Fair Work Act dealt with. The application was filed out of time. Certified Autos Pty. Ltd. and the Respondent were the respondents. Deputy President Easton heard the case.
the Applicant v Ramsay Health
the Applicant sought an extension of time to file an application under section 394 of the Fair Work Act. The Fair Work Commission did not provide details about the original matter that led to this request. Deputy President Dobson heard the application.
the Applicant v Basso WA Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced employment with Basso WA Pty Ltd, a food, beverages and tobacco manufacturer, in 2021. She was dismissed in 2024. the Applicant brought an application to the Fair Work Commission concerning a dismissal.
Thi Cam Linh Nguyen v The Hive Sunshine Pty Ltd (I9 Education)
The Applicant commenced employment with The Hive Sunshine Pty Ltd, trading as I9 Education, in 2023. She worked as an educator. The applicant made an application to the Fair Work Commission seeking a remedy for unfair dismissal. The Commission’s focus was on whether the Respondent had a valid reason for the dismissal and whether the dismissal was harsh.
the Applicant v Server Edge Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced employment with Server Edge Pty Ltd. He applied for an unfair dismissal remedy. The Fair Work Commission considered whether associated entities existed, whether the Applicant met the minimum employment period, and whether a genuine redundancy existed. Deputy President Colman heard the case.
the Applicant v Stantins Financial Services Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced employment with Stantins Financial Services Pty Ltd. The Fair Work Commission heard an application for an unfair dismissal remedy. the Commissioner heard the case. The decision relates to application U2025/14006.
the Applicant v The Trustee For Conias Hotel Trust Trading AS Embassy Hotel
the Applicant commenced employment with The Trustee For Conias Hotel Trust Trading As Embassy Hotel. He brought an application to deal with contraventions involving dismissal. The Fair Work Commission considered whether the application was lodged in time. the Applicant initially filed some documents but not the application form itself. The Commission had to decide if this constituted ‘filing’ the application.
the Applicant v Security In Depth Pty Ltd
the Applicant worked for Security In Depth Pty Ltd. The Fair Work Commission heard an application for an unfair dismissal remedy. The decision was made by the Commissioner and another Commissioner. The case number was U2025/4163.
the Applicant v EOS Defence Systems Pty Limited
the Applicant brought an application to the Fair Work Commission concerning contraventions involving his dismissal. The case was heard by the Commissioner. The document itself provides very limited factual detail, stating only that it concerns an application to deal with contraventions involving dismissal.
the Applicant v NT Recycling Solutions Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced an application for unfair dismissal against NT Recycling Solutions Pty Ltd. The Fair Work Commission found that the Applicant failed to respond to directions and did not progress his application. The matter concerned a dispute about his employment with the Respondent.
the Applicant v C21PA Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced employment with C21PA Pty Ltd. The company operates in the construction industry. the Applicant brought an application to the Fair Work Commission seeking an unfair dismissal remedy. The Commission's document viewer was unavailable, and the decision is only accessible via a downloadable file.
the Applicant v The Returned & Services League Of Australia (Tasmania Branch) Inc.
the Applicant brought an application to the Fair Work Commission seeking a remedy for unfair dismissal. the Applicant was employed by The Returned & Services League of Australia (Tasmania Branch) Inc. The details of the dismissal and the reasons for it are not detailed in the provided text.
the Applicant v Australian Capital Territory
the Applicant commenced employment with the Australian Capital Territory in 2021. He was dismissed from his role in December 2024. the Applicant brought an application to the Fair Work Commission seeking a remedy for unfair dismissal. the Deputy President heard the application.
the Applicant v SAE Institute Pty Limited
the Applicant commenced employment with SAE Institute Pty Limited. The Fair Work Commission heard an application for an unfair dismissal remedy. Deputy President Saunders heard the case.
the Applicant v Sunset Group Australia Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced employment with Sunset Group Australia Pty Ltd. The Deputy President considered an application for an unfair dismissal remedy. The document provides metadata about the decision, including its publication date and the Deputy President who made the decision.
the Applicant v Catholic Schools Office Diocese Of Armidale
the Applicant commenced employment with the Catholic Schools Office Diocese of Armidale. The Fair Work Commission heard an application for an unfair dismissal remedy. Deputy President Roberts presided over the case. The document indicates this is decision [2025] FWC 3700.
the Applicant v Ca Dispensary Pty Ltd Trading As Ihealth Pharmacy
the Applicant commenced employment with Ca Dispensary Pty Ltd, trading as Ihealth Pharmacy, in 2023. She lodged an application to the Fair Work Commission seeking an order for unfair dismissal. the Respondent raised a jurisdictional objection, arguing the Applicant was not dismissed. the Commissioner heard the application.
the Applicant v Viva Energy Retail Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced employment with Viva Energy Retail Pty Ltd in 2023. He was dismissed from his position. the Applicant applied to the Fair Work Commission for an unfair dismissal remedy. The Commission considered whether the dismissal was harsh, unjust, or unreasonable.
the Applicant v Sap Australia Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced employment with Sap Australia Pty Ltd. The details of his employment and the reasons for his dismissal are not detailed in the provided text. The Fair Work Commission heard an application for an unfair dismissal remedy.
the Applicant v Taverns Of Victoria Proprietary Limited
the Applicant commenced employment with Taverns Of Victoria Proprietary Limited in 2021. He was dismissed from his position in 2024. the Applicant brought an application to the Fair Work Commission seeking an unfair dismissal remedy. The Commission notes that the decision is identified as U2025/16049 and is dated 2025.
the Applicant v Amart Furniture
the Applicant commenced employment with Amart Furniture in 2021. The Fair Work Commission was asked to deal with contraventions involving his dismissal. The specifics of the dismissal and the contraventions are not detailed in the provided text.
the Applicant v Westcoast Plant Hire Pty Ltd
the Applicant sought to have an extension of time to deal with contraventions involving a dismissal. Westcoast Plant Hire Pty Ltd was the respondent. The Fair Work Commission considered an application under section 365 of the Fair Work Act.
the Applicant v Youturn Limited
This decision concerns two applications before the Fair Work Commission. the Applicant and another individual both brought applications against Youturn Limited. The applications relate to contraventions involving dismissal. the Commissioner heard the applications.
the Applicant v Karingal St Laurence Limited
the Applicant commenced employment with Karingal St Laurence Limited, a residential aged care provider, in 2021. The Fair Work Commission was asked to deal with contraventions involving his dismissal. the Deputy President heard the application.
the Applicant v Upper Ed Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced an application for an unfair dismissal remedy against Upper Ed Pty Ltd. The Fair Work Commission found that the application was not made in accordance with the Fair Work Act. the Deputy President, Easton DP, dismissed the application.
the Applicant v Phillippas Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced employment with Phillippas Pty Ltd. The Fair Work Commission heard an application for an unfair dismissal remedy. The decision was made by the Commissioner and a Deputy President.
the Applicant v Five Star Outdoors Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced employment with Five Star Outdoors Pty Ltd, a retailer of outdoor equipment, in 2023. He was dismissed from his position in May 2025. the Applicant brought an application for an unfair dismissal remedy to the Fair Work Commission.
the Applicant v Lovetech Group Pty Ltd
the Applicant applied to the Fair Work Commission to deal with contraventions involving dismissal. The application was filed out of time. Lovetech Group Pty Ltd was the respondent. Deputy President Dobson heard the case.
the Applicant v Serco Australia Pty Limited
the Applicant commenced employment with Serco Australia Pty Limited. The Fair Work Commission heard an application for an unfair dismissal remedy. Deputy President Masson heard the case. The document provides metadata about the decision, including publication date and file details, but lacks specific details about the events leading to the dismissal.
the Applicant v Rainvale Pty. Limited
the Applicant brought an application for an unfair dismissal remedy. The Fair Work Commission initiated a dismissal under section 587 because the Applicant’s application was not prosecuted. This means he failed to follow the procedures required to continue his case. Deputy President Easton heard the matter.
the Applicant v Zenpure Cleaning Services
the Applicant brought an application for an unfair dismissal remedy against Zenpure Cleaning Services. The Commission considered whether the application had reasonable prospects of success. Deputy President Easton considered the matter.
the Applicant v HOPEA Family Trust t/as HoseCo Australia Pty Ltd
the Applicant, an employee, sought an unfair dismissal remedy from HOPEA Family Trust t/as HoseCo Australia Pty Ltd. The Fair Work Commission found that the Applicant’s application for an unfair dismissal remedy was not made in accordance with the Fair Work Act. The application fee was also not paid or waived.
the Applicant v QRT Labour Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced working for QRT Labour Pty Ltd in 2023. He was dismissed in 2024. the Applicant applied to the Fair Work Commission seeking to have the Fair Work Commission deal with contraventions involving his dismissal. The Commission notes that the document available online is a PDF and does not contain the full decision.
the Applicant v Get Glossed Painters and Decorators Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced employment with Get Glossed Painters and Decorators Pty Ltd. The company is a painting business. the Applicant brought an application for an unfair dismissal remedy to the Fair Work Commission. The decision does not detail the specific reasons for his dismissal.
Application by Kashchuk
An application was made to the Fair Work Commission regarding a contravention involving dismissal. The Deputy President, Dobson (formerly Moltoni), heard the application. The case number is C2025/11158. The decision addresses a jurisdictional objection, specifically concerning the application being filed out of time.
the Applicant v Cleanway Group Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced employment with Cleanway Group Pty Ltd. The Fair Work Commission case [2025] FWC 3604 concerns an application for an unfair dismissal remedy. The matter was dismissed by the Commission due to the Applicant’s failure to prosecute his claim, meaning he did not actively pursue the case. Deputy President Easton made the decision.
the Applicant v Deakin University
the Applicant brought an application to the Fair Work Commission regarding an unfair dismissal. The Commission considered whether to extend the time for lodging the application. Deputy President Colman and a Deputy President heard the case.
the Applicant v Department Of Transport And Planning
the Applicant commenced working for the Department of Transport and Planning. The matter concerns an application for an unfair dismissal remedy. The Fair Work Commission has not provided specific details about the events leading to the dismissal.
the Applicant v Linfox Australia Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced employment with Linfox Australia Pty Ltd. The matter concerns an application for an unfair dismissal remedy. the Commissioner heard the application. The document provides metadata about the decision, including its publication date and case number U2024/12654.
the Applicant v Tuggeranong Vikings Swim Club Inc
the Applicant commenced employment with the Tuggeranong Vikings Swim Club Inc in 2023. He worked as a swim coach. the Applicant made an application to the Fair Work Commission seeking an order that his dismissal was unfair. The Commission heard evidence regarding the circumstances of his termination.
the Applicant v OS MCAP Pty Ltd
the Applicant was employed by OS MCAP Pty Ltd. The Fair Work Commission considered an application for an unfair dismissal remedy. The decision references previous decisions including OS MCAP Pty Ltd v the Applicant ([2025] FWCFB 284).
the Applicant v Imile Delivery & Logistic Pty Ltd
the Applicant sought an unfair dismissal remedy from Imile Delivery & Logistic Pty Ltd. He applied to the Fair Work Commission outside the standard time limit. The company is a logistics business. the Commissioner considered whether to grant an extension of time for the Applicant’s application under section 394(2) of the Fair Work Act.
the Applicant v Scotch Oakburn College Inc.
the Applicant brought an application to the Fair Work Commission. The details of the application are not provided in the supplied text. The case was heard before the Commissioner. Scotch Oakburn College Inc. was the Respondent. The decision was published on 7 July 2025.
the Applicant v WorleyParsons Engineering Consultancies Co
the Applicant, an employee, brought an application to the Fair Work Commission concerning an unfair dismissal. He was employed by WorleyParsons Engineering Consultancies Co. The Commission considered the circumstances of his dismissal and whether it was harsh, unjust or unreasonable. The decision references several previous cases.
the Applicant v Bama Services/ Bama Facilities Maintenance
the Applicant brought an application for an unfair dismissal remedy against Bama Services and Bama Facilities Maintenance. The Fair Work Commission notes the application was not made in accordance with the Act, and the application fee was not paid or waived. Deputy President Easton dismissed the application.
Application by the Applicant
The Applicant applied to the Fair Work Commission to deal with contraventions involving a dismissal. The application was made outside of the standard 21-day time limit. Deputy President Masson and another Deputy President considered the application.
the Applicant v Coles Camden
the Applicant commenced working for Coles Camden. She applied for an unfair dismissal remedy. The Fair Work Commission considered whether the application had reasonable prospects of success.
the Applicant v Topshelf Tools Australia Pty Ltd
the Applicant brought an application for an unfair dismissal remedy against Topshelf Tools Australia Pty Ltd. The Fair Work Commission considered whether the application had reasonable prospects of success. Deputy President Easton heard the case.
the Applicant v Affinity Nursing Recruitment Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced employment with Affinity Nursing Recruitment Pty Ltd. She applied to the Fair Work Commission for an unfair dismissal remedy. The company raised a jurisdictional objection, arguing that the Applicant was a casual employee and did not meet the minimum employment period requirement for an unfair dismissal claim. The company argued her employment was not ‘regular and systematic’.
the Applicant v Circle Of Life Chiropractic And Natural Therapies Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced employment with Circle Of Life Chiropractic And Natural Therapies Pty Ltd. the Deputy President heard an application to deal with contraventions involving dismissal. The case number was C2025/10265.
the Applicant v Compasscorp Pty Ltd
the Applicant brought an application for an unfair dismissal remedy against Compasscorp Pty Ltd. The Fair Work Commission considered whether the application had reasonable prospects of success. The decision was made by Deputy President Easton and another Deputy President.
the Applicant v the Respondent & the Second Respondent
the Applicant sought an extension of time to file an unfair dismissal claim. The Fair Work Commission considered her application in the matter of the Applicant v the Respondent & the Second Respondent (U2025/17596).
the Applicant v Independence Australia Group Limited
the Applicant commenced work with Independence Australia Group Limited. He subsequently filed an application for an unfair dismissal remedy. The application was lodged outside the standard time limit. The Fair Work Commission considered whether to grant an extension of time for the application.
Application by John Holland Pty Ltd & Bouygues Construction Australia Pty Ltd t/a T2D CJV
the Applicant applied to the Fair Work Commission for approval of a greenfields agreement and a tunnel greenfields agreement. These agreements related to the North South Corridor – River Torrens to Darlington Project in South Australia. The Australian Workers’ Union (South Australia Branch) was also involved. The Commission considered applications AG2025/3233 and AG2025/3248.
the Applicant v Jet Excavators and Trucks Pty Ltd The Trustee for The M & J Jennings Family Trust
the Applicant brought an application to the Fair Work Commission for an unfair dismissal remedy. The application was lodged more than 55 days after his dismissal, which is outside the standard time limit. the Applicant was previously employed by Jet Excavators and Trucks Pty Ltd, a company managed by The Trustee for The M & J Jennings Family Trust. He submitted medical certificates to partially explain the delay, but the Commission did not grant an extension of time.
the Applicant v Data3 Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced employment with Data3 Pty Ltd. The Deputy President considered an application relating to contraventions involving her dismissal. The case number was C2025/7825. The decision was published on 25 November 2025.
the Applicant v the Respondent & Spinifex IT Global Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced proceedings in the Fair Work Commission. The matter involved an application relating to contraventions involving dismissal. Spinifex IT Global Pty Ltd raised an objection to the application, arguing it was lodged out of time. There was also disagreement regarding the date of dismissal. the Commissioner considered these issues.
the Applicant v Pearson’s Farm & Animal Rescue Limited
the Applicant commenced working for Pearson’s Farm & Animal Rescue Limited. The organisation terminated her employment. the Applicant brought an application to the Fair Work Commission, claiming she was unfairly dismissed. Pearson’s Farm & Animal Rescue Limited raised a jurisdictional objection, arguing the Applicant was not dismissed but her employment ended. The Commission needed to determine if a dismissal occurred for the application to proceed.
the Applicant v the Respondent & Safe Hands Group Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced employment with Safe Hands Group Pty Ltd, trading as the Respondent, in 2023. He worked as a personal trainer. The Applicant argued he was dismissed. Safe Hands Group argued his employment was terminated due to a restructure and he was offered a new role. The Fair Work Commission had to determine whether the Applicant was dismissed.
the Applicant v The Trustee For Dadon No. 37 Family Trust
the Applicant commenced employment with The Trustee For Dadon No. 37 Family Trust, trading as Northside Fresh, in November 2023. He worked as a kitchen hand. the Applicant claimed he was unfairly dismissed. the Respondent argued the dismissal was not unfair.
the Applicant v Playside Studios Limited
the Applicant commenced employment with Playside Studios Limited in 2021. He was terminated from his role in November 2023. the Applicant brought an application to the Fair Work Commission seeking orders relating to contraventions involving his dismissal. the Deputy President heard the application.
the Applicant v MGN Corporate Services Pty Ltd
the Applicant brought a claim against MGN Corporate Services Pty Ltd. The Fair Work Commission considered an application to deal with contraventions involving dismissal. The specifics of the dismissal and the contraventions are not detailed in the provided text.
the Applicant v Elite1 Group Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced work with Elite1 Group Pty Ltd. He subsequently filed an application for an unfair dismissal remedy. The application was lodged out of time, requiring him to seek relief under section 394(3) of the Fair Work Act. The Commission needed to consider whether there were sufficient grounds to grant relief from the time limit.
the Applicant v the Respondent & Shine Time Music Therapy Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced working for Shine Time Music Therapy Pty Ltd. The matter concerned an application to deal with general protections contraventions involving dismissal. The Fair Work Commission considered whether a termination occurred at the employer’s initiative. the Applicant brought the application.
the Applicant v Salon & Barber Supply Co. Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced an unfair dismissal claim against Salon & Barber Supply Co. Pty Ltd. The company objected to the application's jurisdiction, arguing the Respondent’s redundancy was genuine. The Fair Work Commission considered whether the redundancy was genuine and whether the application was properly before the Commission.
the Applicant v The University of Sydney & Ors
the Applicant commenced proceedings in the Fair Work Commission concerning his employment with The University of Sydney. He alleged adverse action related to a dismissal. The University argued the application lacked jurisdiction, asserting the Applicant had not been dismissed but instead resigned. the Commissioner considered whether the Applicant felt forced to resign and whether the employer’s conduct contributed to that feeling.
the Applicant v The Trustee for IWG Business Trust
the Applicant brought an application to the Fair Work Commission concerning contraventions involving his dismissal. The Trustee for IWG Business Trust was the Respondent. the Commissioner heard the case. The document itself is incomplete, providing limited details about the events leading to the application.
Application by Interact Australia Ltd Trading AS Interact Australia
Interact Australia Ltd, trading as Interact Australia, applied to the Fair Work Commission to vary redundancy pay. The specific details of the application are not provided in the supplied text. The decision was made on December 12, 2025, and published on December 31, 2024.
the Applicant v Sunshine Coast Grammar School
the Applicant commenced proceedings in the Fair Work Commission seeking an unfair dismissal remedy from Sunshine Coast Grammar School. The application was lodged out of time. the Applicant was previously employed as a teacher at the school. The Commission notes the application was filed significantly beyond the standard time limit for such claims.
Application by the Applicant
The Applicant applied to the Fair Work Commission for an order to stop bullying. The application concerned his workplace in the agricultural industry. The Commission considered whether there was a risk the Applicant would continue to be bullied at work.
Richard McLeish v GNM Australia Pty Ltd
Richard McLeish commenced employment with GNM Australia Pty Ltd. The Fair Work Commission considered an application for an unfair dismissal remedy. The case number was U2025/3311. A Commissioner heard the application.
the Applicant v Infrabuild Trading Pty Ltd
the Applicant brought an application to the Fair Work Commission concerning contraventions involving a dismissal. Infrabuild Trading Pty Ltd was the respondent. The Commission considered whether the Applicant was dismissed and whether he was an employee. The Commissioner found that the Applicant was an independent contractor, not an employee, and therefore not dismissed within the meaning of the Fair Work Act.
Application by the Applicant
The Applicant applied to the Fair Work Commission for an order to stop bullying. The Commission considered whether the application had reasonable prospects of success. The decision was made by Commissioner McKinnon and a Commissioner. The case relates to services provided in the gardening services industry.
the Applicant v Vivin Imports Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced employment with Vivin Imports Pty Ltd. The company imports and distributes food products. the Applicant was dismissed from his role. He then brought an unfair dismissal claim to the Fair Work Commission. The Commission notes that the Respondent did not provide a valid reason for the dismissal and that the procedure followed was not reasonable.
the Applicant v Franklyn Blinds Awnings Security
the Applicant brought an application for an unfair dismissal remedy. The Fair Work Commission dismissed the application under section 587 of the Fair Work Act. This occurred because the application was not prosecuted by the Applicant. Deputy President Easton made the decision.
Application by the Applicant
the Applicant applied to the Fair Work Commission seeking an order to stop bullying. The Commission, comprised of McKinnon C and a Commissioner, considered whether the alleged bullying occurred 'while at work'. The specific details of the bullying allegations and the parties involved are not detailed in the provided text.
Application by O'Brien Group Australia Pty Ltd Trading AS O'Brien Group Australia
O'Brien Group Australia Pty Ltd, trading as O'Brien Group, applied to vary a redundancy pay determination. The company sought to adjust redundancy pay obligations for an employee who obtained acceptable employment. The application related to cases C2024/9364 and C2024/9403.
the Applicant v Vegie Bandits Pty Ltd
the Applicant brought an application for an unfair dismissal remedy against Vegie Bandits Pty Ltd. The Fair Work Commission found the application was not made in accordance with the Fair Work Act. Deputy President Easton dismissed the application.
the Applicant v Black Rhino (Shamrock) Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced employment with Black Rhino (Shamrock) Pty Ltd. The matter concerned whether a settlement agreement had been reached between the Applicant and his former employer. the Commissioner considered the application and related documents.
Application by the Applicant
The Applicant applied to the Fair Work Commission for an order to stop bullying. The application involved Woolworths Group Limited and the Respondent. The Fair Work Commission has not provided further details about the circumstances leading to the application.
the Applicant v DT Infrastructure Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced employment with DT Infrastructure Pty Ltd. The Fair Work Commission considered an application for an unfair dismissal remedy. The Commission found the application had no reasonable prospects of success and was dismissed.
the Applicant v Commonwealth Of Australia As Represented By Services Australia
the Applicant, an employee of the Commonwealth of Australia, represented by Services Australia, sought an unfair dismissal remedy. She filed her application out of time. The Fair Work Commission considered whether there were exceptional circumstances to justify proceeding with the application despite the delay.
the Applicant v 622 142 214 Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced employment with 622 142 214 Pty Ltd. The Fair Work Commission received an application concerning contraventions involving his dismissal. The case number is C2025/122. The decision was published on 24 June 2025.
Application by Volunteer Centre Of Western Australia Inc Trading AS Volunteering WA
The Volunteer Centre of Western Australia Inc, trading as Volunteering WA, sought to vary redundancy pay. The Fair Work Commission considered an application related to this variation. The decision references Australian Commercial Catering Pty Ltd v Powell & Togia, a previous Fair Work Full Bench decision. The case number is C2025/5019.
Application by the Applicant
The Applicant applied to the Fair Work Commission for an order to stop bullying. The details of the bullying and the parties involved are not provided in the available text. The application was identified as AB2024/950. The Commissioner and another Commissioner heard the application.
the Applicant v Green By Nature
the Applicant brought an application for an unfair dismissal remedy against Green By Nature. The Commissioner considered whether the application had reasonable prospects of success. The decision was made by Deputy President Easton.
the Applicant v M.J. Harris Group Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced employment with M.J. Harris Group Pty Ltd. The company is in the construction industry. the Applicant resigned from his position. The Fair Work Commission found that he was effectively dismissed because he was not paid for his work. the Deputy President heard the application.
the Applicant v Ojt 399 Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced employment with Ojt 399 Pty Ltd. The company applied to deal with contraventions involving his dismissal. The Fair Work Commission considered whether the Applicant was dismissed for the purposes of s 386(1) of the Fair Work Act.
Application by the Applicant
the Applicant made an application to the Fair Work Commission. The application related to contraventions involving dismissal. The Fair Work Commission notes the application fee was not paid or waived, and the application was not made in accordance with the Act.
the Applicant v Directions Health Services Ltd
the Applicant commenced employment with Directions Health Services Ltd in 2023. The Fair Work Commission was asked to deal with contraventions involving her dismissal. Deputy President Dean heard the case. The document details a Fair Work Commission decision, but the specifics of the case are not provided in the available text.
Application by Utility Mapping (Aust) Pty Ltd Trading AS Utility Mapping
Utility Mapping, a company providing scientific services, applied to the Fair Work Commission to vary redundancy pay for an employee. The employee was offered acceptable alternative employment with reduced seniority following a redundancy. The company sought to reduce the redundancy pay based on this alternative employment.
Application by the Applicant
The Applicant applied to the Fair Work Commission for an order to stop bullying at work. The Commission considered whether her application had reasonable prospects of success. The decision was made by Commissioner McKinnon.
the Applicant v iProperty Express Pty Ltd
the Applicant brought an application for an unfair dismissal remedy against iProperty Express Pty Ltd. The Fair Work Commission considered whether her termination was harsh, unjust, or unreasonable. Deputy President Masson heard the case.
the Applicant v Vossloh Cogifer Australia Pty Ltd
the Applicant sought an extension of time to file an unfair dismissal application. He worked for Vossloh Cogifer Australia Pty Ltd. The Deputy President considered whether exceptional circumstances existed to justify the extension. The application was U2025/14272.
the Applicant v The Corporation of The Roman Catholic Diocese of Toowoomba Catholiccare Social Services
the Applicant brought an application for an unfair dismissal remedy against The Corporation of The Roman Catholic Diocese of Toowoomba Catholiccare Social Services. The Fair Work Commission considered whether the application was made in accordance with the Fair Work Act. Deputy President Easton was involved in the decision.
the Applicant v Stainless Designs Australia Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced employment with Stainless Designs Australia Pty Ltd. The Fair Work Commission heard an application for an unfair dismissal remedy. Deputy President Clancy heard the case. The document is a decision from the Fair Work Commission.
the Applicant v Salama Tea House
the Applicant sought an unfair dismissal remedy from the Fair Work Commission. The case involved Salama Tea House. Deputy President Colman heard the application. The core issue was whether the time limit for lodging the application should be extended.
the Applicant v East Arnhem Regional Council
the Applicant commenced employment with East Arnhem Regional Council. The Fair Work Commission heard an application concerning contraventions involving her dismissal. The decision was made by the Commissioner and another Commissioner. The case number was C2025/2502.
the Applicant v The Trustee for the Motorcycle Holdings Group Unit Trust Trading AS TeamMoto
the Applicant commenced employment with TeamMoto in 2021. He worked as a motorcycle technician. The Fair Work Commission heard an application relating to contraventions involving his dismissal. The specific details of the dismissal and the contraventions are not detailed in the provided text.
the Applicant v Goodride Tyres Pty Ltd & 360 Personnel Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced employment with Goodride Tyres Pty Ltd in 2023, initially through 360 Personnel Pty Ltd as a recruitment agency. He worked as a tyre technician. the Applicant brought an application to the Fair Work Commission to deal with contraventions involving his dismissal. Deputy President heard the application.
the Applicant v APMG Corporate Solutions Pty. Ltd.
the Applicant brought an application for an unfair dismissal remedy against APMG Corporate Solutions Pty. Ltd. The Fair Work Commission considered whether the Applicant met the minimum employment period and whether the Respondent was a small business employer. The company employed fewer than 15 employees at the time of termination.
the Applicant v Grae Bay Pty Ltd
the Applicant brought an application for an unfair dismissal remedy against Grae Bay Pty Ltd. The Fair Work Commission considered whether the Applicant had a sufficient minimum employment period to bring the claim. The Commission also examined whether a transfer of business or association with other entities impacted the continuity of the Applicant’s service.
Shashi Mathew v Australian Guild Of Education Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced employment with Australian Guild of Education Pty Ltd. The Fair Work Commission heard an application for an unfair dismissal remedy. Deputy President Colman heard the case. The decision references previous cases Florenca, Elvina v Industrial Foundation For Accident Prevention T/A IFAP and Bowden, Gloria.
the Applicant v Hempel (Wattyl) Australia Pty Ltd
the Applicant brought an application to the Fair Work Commission concerning an unfair dismissal. The details of the dismissal and the reasons behind it are not provided in the supplied text. The case was heard by a Commissioner. The document is a decision from the Fair Work Commission, dated 2024-12-31, with the citation [2025] FWC 1659.
the Applicant v Air Radiators
the Applicant brought an application for an unfair dismissal remedy against Air Radiators. The Commission considered whether the application had reasonable prospects of success. The decision notes the application was U2025/2719.
the Applicant v MLC Wealth Limited
the Applicant commenced employment with MLC Wealth Limited. The Fair Work Commission heard an application for an unfair dismissal remedy. the Commissioner presided over the case. The decision was published on December 9, 2025.
the Applicant v Springtime Poultry Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced employment with Springtime Poultry Pty Ltd. The Fair Work Commission heard an application for an unfair dismissal remedy. the Commissioner presided over the case. The decision references several previous cases, including Nguyen, Thinh Xuan v Vietnamese Community in Australia T/A Vietnamese Community Ethnic School South Australia Chapter and A1 Distributions v Humphries, Alan.
the Applicant v Vulcan Mine Management Pty Ltd
the Applicant brought an application for an unfair dismissal remedy against Vulcan Mine Management Pty Ltd. The Fair Work Commission considered whether the application had reasonable prospects of success. Deputy President Easton was involved in the decision.
the Applicant v The Trustee for Burleigh Pavilion Unit Trust
the Applicant brought an application for an unfair dismissal remedy against The Trustee for Burleigh Pavilion Unit Trust. The Fair Work Commission considered whether the application was made in accordance with the Fair Work Act. the Deputy President, Easton DP, was involved in the decision.
the Applicant v Chandler Macleod Group Limited & Fujitsu Australia Ltd
the Applicant brought an application to the Fair Work Commission under section 365 of the Fair Work Act. He sought to deal with contraventions involving a dismissal. The respondents were Chandler Macleod Group Limited and Fujitsu Australia Ltd. The Commission found that the Applicant was not employed by either of the respondents.
the Applicant v the Respondent
the Applicant sought an order for costs against the Respondent. The Fair Work Commission considered whether the threshold for an order for costs under sections 375B and 611 of the Fair Work Act 2009 was met. The matter involved an application to deal with contraventions involving dismissal.
the Applicant v Diabetes Australia
the Applicant commenced employment with Diabetes Australia. The Fair Work Commission considered an application relating to contraventions involving dismissal. The Commission noted that the Applicant was not dismissed.
Mrs Kara Worthington v Lrh
the Applicant commenced employment with Lrh in 2023. She was dismissed from her position. the Applicant brought an application to the Fair Work Commission seeking an unfair dismissal remedy. The Commission heard the application.
the Applicant v NVC Group Ltd
the Applicant was involved in an application for an unfair dismissal remedy. The Fair Work Commission initiated dismissal under section 587(1)(c) due to the Applicant’s failure to prosecute the case. NVC Group Ltd was the respondent.
the Applicant v Region Operations Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced employment with Region Operations Pty Ltd. She subsequently filed for an unfair dismissal remedy with the Fair Work Commission. The Commission needed to determine if the Applicant was actually dismissed. The decision notes that the Applicant was not dismissed.
the Applicant v Air Liquide Healthcare Pty. Ltd.
the Applicant commenced proceedings in the Fair Work Commission seeking an unfair dismissal remedy. Air Liquide Healthcare Pty. Ltd. dismissed her. The Commission found the application had no reasonable prospects of success and dismissed it.
the Applicant v QIC LIMITED
the Applicant was employed by QIC Limited under a fixed-term contract. The contract ended when the term expired. the Applicant applied to the Fair Work Commission, arguing his contract’s expiry constituted a dismissal. The Commission considered whether the end of the fixed term amounted to a dismissal under the Fair Work Act.
the Applicant v MH Management (Qld) Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced work for MH Management (Qld) Pty Ltd. He later filed an application for unfair dismissal to the Fair Work Commission. The application was lodged outside the standard time limit. the Applicant explained the delay was due to a serious medical condition. The Commission considered whether to grant an extension of time for the application.
the Applicant v Healthscope Operations Pty Ltd
the Applicant was employed as a registered nurse by Healthscope Operations Pty Ltd, the respondent. The Applicant brought an application to deal with contraventions involving her dismissal. The Fair Work Commission was not provided with the specifics of the dismissal or the contraventions alleged.
Veasna Kong v Commonwealth of Australia as represented by the Department of the Treasury
The Applicant commenced employment with the Department of the Treasury in 2021. The Fair Work Commission heard an application to deal with contraventions involving dismissal. The Deputy President Dean and another Deputy President were involved in the decision.
the Applicant v Diversify Employment Pty Ltd
the Applicant sought an extension of time to deal with contraventions. Diversify Employment Pty Ltd, the respondent, was involved. The Fair Work Commission considered an application made under section 365 of the Fair Work Act.
Application by Monaco
An application was made to the Fair Work Commission regarding a contravention involving dismissal. The application was filed out of time. Deputy President Millhouse heard the case. The Fair Work Commission did not consider there were exceptional circumstances to allow the application to proceed.
the Applicant v The Trustee For Simon Bando Family Trust Trading AS Go Home Lifestyle Products
the Applicant brought an application to the Fair Work Commission concerning an unfair dismissal. The Respondent was The Trustee For Simon Bando Family Trust, trading as Go Home Lifestyle Products. The Commission considered the circumstances of her dismissal and whether it was harsh, unjust, or unreasonable. The decision was made on December 31, 2024.
the Applicant v University Of New South Wales
the Applicant commenced employment with the University of New South Wales in 2021. She was dismissed in 2024. The Applicant brought an application for an unfair dismissal remedy. the Deputy President and Cross DP heard the matter.
the Applicant v Spectrum Labour Pty Ltd
the Applicant applied to the Fair Work Commission for an unfair dismissal remedy. He was previously employed by Spectrum Labour Pty Ltd. The application was lodged out of time. The Commission notes he did not provide an acceptable reason for the delay in lodging his application.
Application by the Applicant
The Applicant applied to the Fair Work Commission for an order to stop bullying. The application was heard by Commissioner McKinnon. The case relates to the amusement, events and recreation industry. The Commission considered whether the application had reasonable prospects of success.
the Applicant v Sigma Resourcing Pty. Ltd.
the Applicant brought an application for an unfair dismissal remedy against Sigma Resourcing Pty. Ltd. The Fair Work Commission considered the circumstances of his dismissal.
the Applicant v Queensland Rail Transit Authority Trading AS Queensland Rail
the Applicant, an employee of Queensland Rail Transit Authority, was dismissed after a workplace incident involving a rail customer. The Fair Work Commission heard that the Applicant’s actions escalated a situation. He had a history of disciplinary issues and had received repeated training. The application concerned an application for an unfair dismissal remedy.
the Applicant v Taxtips Blacktown Pty. Ltd.
the Applicant commenced an unfair dismissal claim against Taxtips Blacktown Pty. Ltd. The matter involved an application for an unfair dismissal remedy. The application was discontinued before a final hearing. the Respondent focused on a different reason for the dismissal than what was initially provided to the employee. the Commissioner considered whether the Respondent’s actions were vexatious.
the Applicant v Wangaratta Abattoirs Pty. Ltd.
the Applicant commenced an application for unfair dismissal against Wangaratta Abattoirs Pty. Ltd. The Fair Work Commission notes that the Applicant filed his application outside the standard 21-day time limit. The company operates in the meat processing industry. Deputy President Masson heard the case.
the Applicant v Endeavour Group Limited
the Applicant sought to have an application dealt with under section 365 of the Fair Work Act. This section allows the Fair Work Commission to extend time limits for filing applications. The specifics of the original application are not detailed in the provided text.
the Applicant v National Patient Transport Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced employment with National Patient Transport Pty Ltd in 2023. The company provides patient transport services. The matter concerns an application to deal with contraventions involving a dismissal. the Commissioner heard the application.
Application by the Applicant
The Applicant made an application to the Fair Work Commission. The Commission did not provide details about the nature of the application or the circumstances leading to it. The Deputy President Easton heard the application.
the Applicant v Boundary Lane Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced employment with Boundary Lane Pty Ltd, a company operating a charter business. His role involved operating and maintaining vessels. He brought an unfair dismissal claim. The Fair Work Commission needed to determine if the Applicant was covered by a modern award to proceed with the claim.
the Applicant v Sia Construct Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced employment with Sia Construct Pty Ltd. The Fair Work Commission considered an application for an unfair dismissal remedy. The decision references previous cases, including *Ryman, Jeremy v Thrash Pty Ltd T/A Wisharts Automotive Services*. The document details metadata related to the decision, including publication dates and author information.
Kathy Stabe v Jackson Garden And Landscape Supplies
The Applicant commenced employment with Jackson Garden and Landscape Supplies. The Fair Work Commission heard an application for an unfair dismissal remedy. Deputy President Lake presided over the case. The decision references several other Fair Work cases and documents.
Qingchun Wang v RSL CARE RNDS LIMITED
the Applicant commenced employment with RSL CARE RNDS LIMITED in 2021. The Fair Work Commission heard an application concerning contraventions involving a dismissal. the Deputy President heard the case.
the Applicant v Revel Group Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced employment with Revel Group Pty Ltd. The Fair Work Commission considered whether the Applicant was dismissed, a requirement for an unfair dismissal claim under the Fair Work Act. The Deputy President had to determine if the Applicant’s employment ended in a way that constituted a dismissal.
the Applicant v Department Of Education
the Applicant commenced proceedings in the Fair Work Commission regarding an unfair dismissal. The Department of Education applied to have the matter dismissed under section 587 of the Fair Work Act, due to the Applicant failing to prosecute her claim. This means she did not actively pursue the case. Deputy President Easton heard the application.
the Applicant v the Respondent
the Applicant brought an application for an unfair dismissal remedy against the Respondent. The Deputy President made the decision.
the Applicant v Doonside Hotel Pty Limited
the Applicant brought an application for an unfair dismissal remedy. The Fair Work Commission considered whether the application had reasonable prospects of success. Deputy President Easton was involved in the decision.
the Applicant v South-East Monash Legal Service Inc.
the Applicant commenced employment with South-East Monash Legal Service Inc in 2019. She made an application to the Fair Work Commission concerning a contravention involving her dismissal. The Commission heard the application.
the Applicant v Bundanon Trust
the Applicant commenced employment with Bundanon Trust in 2018. The Trust is a cultural organisation located in New South Wales. The matter concerns an application to deal with contraventions involving a dismissal. The Fair Work Commission considered whether the Applicant was ‘dismissed’ for the purposes of the Fair Work Act.
Yandong Yang v Zhen Yu Chen Pty Ltd & Ky Plaster And Building Supplies Pty Ltd and Another
the Applicant commenced employment with Zhen Yu Chen Pty Ltd. The Applicant then transferred to Ky Plaster and Building Supplies Pty Ltd, which was related to Zhen Yu Chen Pty Ltd. the Applicant brought an application to the Fair Work Commission. the Deputy President heard the application.
Application by Independent Kitchens & Joinery Pty Ltd
Independent Kitchens & Joinery Pty Ltd applied to the Fair Work Commission to vary a redundancy pay obligation. The details of the original redundancy and the reason for the variation request are not specified in the provided text. the Commissioner heard the application.
the Applicant v Australian Health Practitioner Regulatory Agency
the Applicant brought an application to the Fair Work Commission seeking a remedy for unfair dismissal. The Australian Health Practitioner Regulatory Agency, the respondent, is a government agency. The Commission's decision is recorded as [2025] FWC 3745 and dated December 5, 2025.
the Applicant v Hikurangi Te Paa (Client)
the Applicant brought an application to the Fair Work Commission concerning contraventions involving dismissal. The case number is C2024/9547. The decision was published on 13 March 2025.
the Applicant v Insight Integration Technology Pty. Limited & the Respondent
the Applicant commenced proceedings in the Fair Work Commission seeking to have a contravention of the Fair Work Act addressed. He was previously dismissed from Insight Integration Technology Pty. Limited, a technology company, and the Respondent was also named as a respondent. The application was filed outside of the standard time limit.
the Applicant v Campbell Construction Co Pty Ltd & Campbell Webb Cabinetry Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced employment with Campbell Construction Co Pty Ltd and Campbell Webb Cabinetry Pty Ltd. He brought an application to the Fair Work Commission concerning a dismissal. The Commission found that the Applicant voluntarily resigned and did not experience a dismissal. The application was subsequently dismissed.
the Applicant v Gemlife Administration Pty Ltd
the Applicant brought an application to the Fair Work Commission. The details of the application are not provided in the supplied text. the Commissioner heard the application. The case number was C2025/10268 and the decision citation is [2025] FWC 3528.
the Applicant v Carsales.com.au Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced employment with Carsales.com.au Pty Ltd. He brought an application to the Fair Work Commission concerning a dismissal. The Fair Work Commission considered whether the Applicant was dismissed within the meaning of section 386(1) of the Fair Work Act.
the Applicant v Goodstart Early Learning Ltd
the Applicant commenced employment with Goodstart Early Learning Ltd. The Commission considered whether the Applicant was dismissed or if her employment ended due to her own actions. the Applicant argued her employment ended because of the Respondent’s conduct. The Fair Work Commission had to determine if a dismissal occurred for the jurisdictional objection.
the Applicant v The Trustee For Syndicate Communications Trust
the Applicant commenced employment with The Trustee For Syndicate Communications Trust, trading as French Accent, in 2021. He was dismissed on 2024-07-26. the Applicant brought an unfair dismissal claim. Deputy President Lake and Commissioner Murray heard the case.
the Applicant v Recording Oasis Pty Ltd & the Respondent
the Applicant brought a claim against Recording Oasis Pty Ltd and the Respondent. The matter concerned whether the Applicant was 'dismissed' from her employment. The Fair Work Commission considered whether the actions of the respondent constituted a dismissal.
the Applicant v Caring For You
the Applicant brought an application to the Fair Work Commission concerning a dismissal. The application was brought outside of the 21-day time limit. Caring For You, the respondent, raised a jurisdictional objection. Deputy President Masson heard the case.
the Applicant v Motorama Springwood
the Applicant commenced employment with Motorama Springwood, a car dealership, in 2021. He was dismissed in 2024. the Applicant brought an application to the Fair Work Commission concerning contraventions involving his dismissal. Deputy President Lake heard the application.
the Applicant v Queensland Railways Institute Inc
the Applicant brought an application to the Fair Work Commission regarding a dismissal dispute. The Commission had to consider whether to allow an extension of time for her application. The case was heard by Commissioner McKinnon.
the Applicant v Toll Transport Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced employment with Toll Transport Pty Ltd in 2018. She was dismissed in 2023. the Applicant brought an application to the Fair Work Commission seeking orders to deal with contraventions involving her dismissal. The Commission notes that the applicant’s application was filed on 23 February 2023.
the Applicant v International Stone Pty Ltd Trading AS CMG Stone (Contemporary Marble and Granite)
the Applicant commenced employment with International Stone Pty Ltd, trading as CMG Stone, in 2023. The company is involved in the supply and installation of marble and granite. the Applicant’s role involved sales and project management. He brought an application to the Fair Work Commission concerning contraventions involving his dismissal.
the Applicant v Andrew Goldman Excavations Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced employment with Andrew Goldman Excavations Pty Ltd. The Fair Work Commission heard an application for an unfair dismissal remedy. The decision was made by the Commissioner and a Deputy President.
the Applicant v Water Corporation
the Applicant commenced employment with the Water Corporation in 2018. He was dismissed in 2023. the Applicant brought an application to the Fair Work Commission seeking orders relating to contraventions involving his dismissal. The specific details of the dismissal and the alleged contraventions are not detailed in the provided text.
the Applicant v the Respondent & Freo Group Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced employment with Freo Group Pty Ltd in 2021. The company is in the leisure and entertainment industry. In 2024, the Applicant made a complaint about a workplace matter. Following this, he was dismissed. He applied to the Fair Work Commission seeking to have his dismissal declared unfair and to receive compensation. Deputy President Wright heard the application.
the Applicant v Matt Porter Pty Ltd & Mr Matt Porter
the Applicant brought an application to the Fair Work Commission concerning contraventions involving dismissal. Matt Porter Pty Ltd and the Respondent were the respondents. The application was made outside of the 21-day time limit.
the Applicant v Orotongroup (Australia) Pty Limited
the Applicant commenced employment with Orotongroup (Australia) Pty Limited. The Fair Work Commission considered an application relating to contraventions involving her dismissal. the Deputy President addressed a jurisdictional objection raised by the Respondent. The application was not dismissed, and the Respondent’s objection was dismissed.
Shanaye Dicker-Lee v The Trustee For VJSS Family Trust
the Applicant brought an application to the Fair Work Commission concerning contraventions involving a dismissal. The Respondent raised a jurisdictional objection. The matter concerned an application under section 365 of the Fair Work Act.
the Applicant v Sydney Catholic Schools Ltd
the Applicant commenced proceedings in the Fair Work Commission concerning a dismissal. Sydney Catholic Schools Ltd was the respondent. The core issue was whether the Fair Work Commission should grant an extension of time for the Applicant to bring her application. The Commission notes the application was filed late.
Tewantin Noosa RSL & Citizens Memorial Club & the Applicant v the Respondent
the Applicant brought an application to the Fair Work Commission against Tewantin Noosa RSL & Citizens Memorial Club and Kevin Graham. The details of the application are not provided in the text.
the Applicant v Lynington Enterprises Pty Ltd
the Applicant brought a general protections application against Lynington Enterprises Pty Ltd. The Applicant alleged she was dismissed. The Fair Work Commission had to determine if the Applicant was dismissed or if she resigned because of actions by her employer. The Commission found the Applicant was dismissed.
the Applicant v the Respondent
the Applicant sought a remedy for unfair dismissal from the Respondent. The application was filed out of time. the Commissioner considered whether there were exceptional circumstances that warranted the application being heard despite the delay.
the Applicant v ORIGIN ENERGY LIMITED
the Applicant brought an application to the Fair Work Commission. The details of the application are not provided in the supplied text. The case was heard by the Commissioner. The case number is C2025/4650.
Mika-Rose Tyson v Blackfisch Films Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced employment with Blackfisch Films Pty Ltd in 2023. She was dismissed from her role. the Applicant then brought an application to the Fair Work Commission concerning contraventions involving her dismissal. the Deputy President heard the application.
the Applicant v the Respondent & Cartelux Australia Pty Ltd
the Applicant brought a claim against the Respondent and Cartelux Australia Pty Ltd. The claim related to a dispute involving dismissal and failure to pay salary for eight months. the Applicant argued he was forced to resign, effectively constituting a dismissal. The Commission considered whether the Applicant was dismissed and whether there was a failure to pay salary.
the Applicant v D & R Lavis
the Applicant had his application for an unfair dismissal remedy dismissed by the Fair Work Commission. The Commission initiated this dismissal under section 587(1)(c) because the Applicant failed to prosecute his own application. This means he didn't actively pursue the case, for example, by attending hearings or filing necessary documents.
the Applicant v Fedex Express Australia Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced employment with Fedex Express Australia Pty Ltd. The Fair Work Commission heard an application for an unfair dismissal remedy. The decision references several previous cases and awards. The document itself is largely inaccessible, with a message indicating an inability to display the document in the viewer and a link to download the PDF.
the Applicant v Auto & General Holdings Pty Limited & the Respondent
the Applicant commenced proceedings in the Fair Work Commission against Auto & General Holdings Pty Limited and the Respondent. The Commission dealt with an application related to a dismissal involving contraventions. the Applicant sought to extend the time for making the application. the Commissioner considered whether exceptional circumstances existed to justify the extension.
the Applicant v The Trustee For The Dynamo Fitness Family Trust
the Applicant brought an application to the Fair Work Commission concerning contraventions involving dismissal. The Trustee For The Dynamo Fitness Family Trust objected to the application's jurisdiction, arguing that the Applicant was not dismissed. The Commission had to determine whether the Applicant was dismissed for the application to proceed. The case references a previous decision, Park, George v LOTW Indroopilly.
the Applicant v Nongshim Australia Pty Ltd
the Applicant sought to file an application to deal with contraventions involving dismissal. She applied to extend the time to file her application. Nongshim Australia Pty Ltd is a food manufacturer. The Fair Work Commission considered whether to grant an extension of time for the Applicant’s application.
the Applicant v Integrated Maintenance Services Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced an application for an unfair dismissal remedy. Integrated Maintenance Services Pty Ltd is the respondent. The Fair Work Commission considered whether to grant an extension of time for the application. the Commissioner heard the application.
the Applicant v Scalabrini Village
the Applicant brought an application to the Fair Work Commission concerning contraventions involving his dismissal from Scalabrini Village. The details of the dismissal and the specific contraventions are not provided in the available text.
Srikant Reddy Nomula Baddam v Central Australian Institute of Technology Pty Limited
the Applicant brought an application to the Fair Work Commission concerning contraventions involving dismissal. The case involved an employee and the Central Australian Institute of Technology Pty Limited. the Deputy President heard the application.
AB v Free Hearts Free Minds
The Fair Work Commission considered an application regarding contraventions involving a dismissal. The details of the parties involved, the Applicant and the Respondent, are not further elaborated in the provided text. The case number is C2024/8663, and the decision number is [2025] FWC 353. The Commissioner heard the case.
AB v Free Hearts Free Minds
The Fair Work Commission considered an application regarding contraventions involving a dismissal. The details of the Applicant and the Respondent are not provided in the supplied text. the Commissioner heard the application, which was numbered C2024/8663.
the Applicant v The Trustee for O'Neill Family Trust T/A Rescue Books Bookkeeping
the Applicant commenced employment with The Trustee for O’Neill Family Trust T/A Rescue Books Bookkeeping in 2023. the Applicant brought a claim to the Fair Work Commission concerning contraventions involving her dismissal. The case was heard by a Commissioner.
the Applicant v The Lucas Group Services Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced employment with The Lucas Group Services Pty Ltd. The Fair Work Commission was asked to deal with contraventions involving his dismissal. the Deputy President heard the case. The decision references a previous case, *Khayam, Saeid v Navitas English Pty Ltd T/A Navitas English*. The case number is C2024/8763.
the Applicant v Optimum Performance Training Pty Ltd
the Applicant brought a general protections application to the Fair Work Commission. She alleged adverse action due to her workplace rights. Optimum Performance Training Pty Ltd, the respondent, argued the application was filed out of time. The Fair Work Commission case number was C2024/9241.
the Applicant v Yuki Global Foods Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced working for Yuki Global Foods Pty Ltd. The matter concerns an application to deal with contraventions involving dismissal. The Fair Work Commission was asked to determine whether the applicant should be granted permission for representation.
the Applicant v LUMIA CARE SERVICES PTY LTD
the Applicant commenced employment with LUMIA CARE SERVICES PTY LTD. He subsequently brought an application to the Fair Work Commission seeking a remedy for unfair dismissal. The company raised a jurisdictional objection, arguing that the Applicant’s dismissal was a case of genuine redundancy.
the Applicant v Mandurah Lotteries House Inc.
the Applicant commenced employment with Mandurah Lotteries House Inc. in 2021. The Fair Work Commission did not provide details of her role or the reason for her dismissal. The matter was heard before Deputy President Beaumont.
the Applicant v Aurum Poultry Employees Pty Ltd
the Applicant brought an application for an unfair dismissal remedy against Aurum Poultry Employees Pty Ltd. He filed the application 97 days after the relevant date. The Fair Work Commission considered whether to grant an extension of time for the application’s filing.
the Applicant v Very Helpful Chats Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced employment with Very Helpful Chats Pty Ltd. The company provides online chat services. the Applicant made an application to the Fair Work Commission seeking an unfair dismissal remedy. The decision does not detail the specific reasons for her dismissal.
the Applicant v Star Track Express Pty Limited
the Applicant commenced employment with Star Track Express Pty Limited. The company dismissed her. the Applicant applied to the Fair Work Commission for an unfair dismissal remedy. The Commission considered the circumstances of her dismissal and whether it was harsh, unjust, or unreasonable.
the Applicant v P M R Profilio Metal Roofing Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced employment with P M R Profilio Metal Roofing Pty Ltd. He brought an application to the Fair Work Commission seeking an unfair dismissal remedy. The company is a metal roofing business. The Commission needed to determine if the Applicant was dismissed, a prerequisite for an unfair dismissal claim.
the Applicant v Alemlube Pty Limited
the Applicant commenced employment with Alemlube Pty Limited. The details of the circumstances leading to his dismissal are not provided in the text. The Fair Work Commission considered an application for an unfair dismissal remedy.
Katie Burgoyne v JD Sports Fashion ANZ
The Applicant commenced proceedings in the Fair Work Commission regarding her dismissal. The Commission initiated a dismissal under section 587, due to a lack of prosecution of the case by the Applicant. Deputy President Easton heard the matter. The decision notes a case previously heard, [2013] FWCFB 2532.
the Applicant v Diamond Beach Holdings Pty Ltd Trading AS Therapy Care
the Applicant worked for Diamond Beach Holdings Pty Ltd, trading as Therapy Care, a provider of in-home care services. She was dismissed from her position. the Applicant sought an unfair dismissal remedy from the Fair Work Commission. The Commission did not have access to the full decision document.
the Applicant v Coles Supermarkets Australia Pty Ltd
the Applicant, an employee of Coles Supermarkets Australia Pty Ltd, brought an application to the Fair Work Commission concerning an unfair dismissal. The details of the dismissal and the reasons behind it are not provided in the available text. the Commissioner heard the application.
Leigh Hoang v Endeavour Energy Network Management Pty Ltd Trading AS Endeavour Energy
The Applicant commenced employment with Endeavour Energy Network Management Pty Ltd, trading as Endeavour Energy, in 2019. The Deputy President heard an application to deal with contraventions involving a dismissal. The precise nature of the contraventions is not detailed in the provided text.
Mrs Sarah Sheets v Drilling Services International Pty Ltd Trading AS Acc Corporate
the Applicant brought an application to the Fair Work Commission concerning contraventions involving her dismissal from Drilling Services International Pty Ltd, trading as Acc Corporate. The specifics of the dismissal and the alleged contraventions are not detailed in the provided text.
the Applicant v Woodward Foods Australia Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced employment with Woodward Foods Australia Pty Ltd. The Fair Work Commission was asked to deal with contraventions involving his dismissal. the Deputy President heard the case. The decision references a previous case, Mrs Christina Sawyer v Wards Accounting Group Pty Ltd.
Application by the Applicant
the Applicant applied to the Fair Work Commission seeking an order to stop bullying. The application was heard by Commissioner McKinnon. The Commission considered whether the application had reasonable prospects of success. The case relates to the vehicle industry.
the Applicant v Procter & Gamble Australia Pty. Limited
the Applicant sought to have an application dealt with under section 365 of the Fair Work Act. This section allows for extensions of time in certain circumstances. Procter & Gamble Australia Pty. Limited was the respondent. The Fair Work Commission considered whether to grant an extension of time for the Applicant’s application.
Aytash Shearer Kocak v Great Southern Plumbing And Maintenance Pty Ltd
The Applicant commenced employment with Great Southern Plumbing And Maintenance Pty Ltd. The Fair Work Commission heard an application for an unfair dismissal remedy. Deputy President Dean and Deputy President heard the case.
the Applicant v The Trustee For T.C. Future Investment Unit Trust
the Applicant brought an application to the Fair Work Commission concerning contraventions involving her dismissal. The Trustee For T.C. Future Investment Unit Trust, the respondent, is the employer. The specifics of the alleged contraventions are not detailed in the provided text.
the Applicant v Department of Education
the Applicant commenced employment with the Department of Education and Training. His employment ended by operation of law, meaning it ceased automatically due to a change in legislation. the Applicant brought an unfair dismissal claim. The Fair Work Commission considered whether his termination was a dismissal for the purposes of the Fair Work Act.
the Applicant v The Trustee For Nehal Family Trust T/A Singh Auto Sales Group
the Applicant commenced employment with The Trustee For Nehal Family Trust T/A Singh Auto Sales Group. The Fair Work Commission was asked to deal with contraventions involving his dismissal. the Deputy President heard the case. The document is a decision from December 12, 2025.
the Applicant v Tully Nursing Home
the Applicant sought a remedy for unfair dismissal from Tully Nursing Home. She filed her application out of time. The Fair Work Commission considered whether there were exceptional circumstances that would allow the application to proceed despite the delay. the Deputy President considered the reasons for the delay and whether they were exceptional.
the Applicant v Grand Group Services Pty. Ltd. & Rana Asad
the Applicant brought an application to the Fair Work Commission concerning his employment with Grand Group Services Pty. Ltd. and the Respondent. The Commission found that the Applicant was not dismissed, but instead resigned. the Applicant was not considered a 'person who was dismissed' for the purposes of the Fair Work Act.
the Applicant v Cutri Fruit Trusco Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced employment with Cutri Fruit Trusco Pty Ltd. The Fair Work Commission considered an application relating to contraventions involving dismissal. the Commissioner heard the case. The decision references previous cases Singh, Harjit v TSA Group and Stogiannidis, Periklis v Victorian Frozen Foods Distributors Pty Ltd.
the Applicant v Gas and Plumbing Australia Pty Ltd
the Applicant, an employee, brought an application to the Fair Work Commission concerning his unfair dismissal from Gas and Plumbing Australia Pty Ltd. The Commission's decision is recorded as [2025] FWC 1792, case number U2024/3016. The decision was published on 26 June 2025.
the Applicant v Sunset Coast International English School Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced employment with Sunset Coast International English School Pty Ltd. The matter concerned an application for an unfair dismissal remedy. The Fair Work Commission was not provided with sufficient information to determine the specific circumstances of the dismissal or the reasons behind it. the Commissioner heard the application.
the Applicant v Mooloolaba Surf Life Saving Supporters Club Inc
the Applicant sought to have an application dealt with under section 365 of the Fair Work Act. This section allows for extensions of time to deal with applications. The Fair Work Commission did not provide details about the original application, only that the Applicant sought an extension of time.
the Applicant v Windsor Hotel South Perth Pty Ltd
the Applicant, an employee, brought an application before the Fair Work Commission. The details of the application are not provided in the text. The case was heard by the Commissioner. The Fair Work Commission case number is C2025/8217.
the Applicant v Haynes Mechanical Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced employment with Haynes Mechanical Pty Ltd. The company is a mechanical workshop. The matter concerned an application to deal with contraventions involving a dismissal. the Commissioner heard the application.
the Applicant v AJC Architects Pty Ltd
the Applicant brought an application to the Fair Work Commission concerning a dismissal. The application relates to a dispute about whether she was dismissed. The Fair Work Commission case number is C2025/9904.
the Applicant v Helensvale Golf Course Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced employment with Helensvale Golf Course Pty Ltd. He resigned from his position. the Applicant then brought an application to the Fair Work Commission concerning a protected action dispute. He alleged the Respondent took adverse action against him leading to his resignation.
the Applicant v Zircodata Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced employment with Zircodata Pty Ltd, a company providing IT services, in 2023. He was dismissed from his role. the Applicant then brought an application to the Fair Work Commission concerning a dismissal. The Commission case number is C2025/8627.
the Applicant v Rainbow Palm Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced employment with Rainbow Palm Pty Ltd. The Fair Work Commission heard an application for an unfair dismissal remedy. The decision relates to a case number U2025/8981.
the Applicant v Defence Electrical Pty Ltd
the Applicant brought an application for an unfair dismissal remedy against Defence Electrical Pty Ltd. The Fair Work Commission has not provided details regarding the events leading to the dismissal or the nature of the Applicant’s role within the company. The decision was made by the Commissioner.
the Applicant v Hawkesford Nominees Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced employment with Hawkesford Nominees Pty Ltd. The company operates in the aged care sector. the Applicant made an application to the Fair Work Commission seeking a remedy for unfair dismissal. Deputy President Binet heard the application.
the Applicant v Certis (ACT) Pty Ltd
the Applicant brought an application to the Fair Work Commission concerning an unfair dismissal. The details of the dismissal and the circumstances leading up to it are not detailed in the provided text.
the Applicant v Scotch & Soda Barbers Pty. Ltd.
the Applicant, an employee, brought an application to the Fair Work Commission regarding an unfair dismissal. The details of the dismissal and the reasons for it are not provided in the supplied text. The case was heard by a Commissioner. The Fair Work Commission case number is U2025/16724.
the Applicant v SVG Structures WA Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced employment with SVG Structures WA Pty Ltd. The Fair Work Commission received an application related to this employment. The application concerned a request for an extension of time. the Commissioner needed to determine if exceptional circumstances existed to grant this extension.
the Applicant v BIS Industries Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced employment with BIS Industries Pty Ltd in 2021. She was dismissed in November 2024. the Applicant brought an unfair dismissal claim. The Fair Work Commission heard the case.
the Applicant v Multhana Property Services Pty Ltd
the Applicant brought an application for an unfair dismissal remedy against Multhana Property Services Pty Ltd. The Fair Work Commission has dismissed the application.
the Applicant v Regional Workforce Management Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced employment with Regional Workforce Management Pty Ltd in 2023. The company provides cleaning services. the Applicant made an application to the Fair Work Commission seeking a remedy for unfair dismissal. The specifics of the dismissal and the reasons for it are not detailed in the provided text.
the Applicant v Smart Tech Retail Group Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced employment with Smart Tech Retail Group Pty Ltd. The Fair Work Commission heard an application for an unfair dismissal remedy. the Commissioner heard and decided the matter.
the Applicant v Tight Seal Pty Limited
the Applicant was employed by Tight Seal Pty Limited. The Fair Work Commission heard an application for an unfair dismissal remedy. the Commissioner and another Deputy President considered the case.
the Applicant v Uber Australia Pty Ltd
the Applicant, an employee of Uber Australia Pty Ltd, had his unfair dismissal application dealt with under section 394 of the Fair Work Act. The Commission initiated the dismissal for want of prosecution, meaning the Applicant did not actively pursue his case. The Deputy President Easton made the decision.
the Applicant v TWG Group Resources Pty Ltd
the Applicant brought an application for an unfair dismissal remedy against TWG Group Resources Pty Ltd. The Commission considered whether the application had reasonable prospects of success. Deputy President Easton considered the matter.
the Applicant v Sunset Metal Roofing Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced employment with Sunset Metal Roofing Pty Ltd. The company is a metal roofing supplier. the Applicant was dismissed from his position. He then applied to the Fair Work Commission for an unfair dismissal remedy. The Commission’s decision is recorded as [2025] FWC 3381.
the Applicant v Taree Indigenous Development & Enterprise Ltd
the Applicant commenced employment with Taree Indigenous Development & Enterprise Ltd. The Fair Work Commission considered an application for an unfair dismissal remedy. Deputy President Easton determined the application had no reasonable prospects of success and was dismissed.
the Applicant v Swarly Pty Ltd
the Applicant brought an application for an unfair dismissal remedy against Swarly Pty Ltd. The Fair Work Commission considered whether the application had reasonable prospects of success. The Commission noted the application was brought under section 394 of the Fair Work Act.
the Applicant v the Respondent
the Applicant brought an application to the Fair Work Commission seeking an unfair dismissal remedy. The Commission found that the Applicant’s application was not made in accordance with the Fair Work Act, and the application fee was not paid or waived. The Deputy President Easton dismissed the application.
the Applicant v Uber Australia Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced work with Uber Australia Pty Ltd. The Fair Work Commission heard an application for an unfair dismissal remedy. The decision was made by the Commissioner and Deputy President on 25 November 2025.
the Applicant v AGL Energy Limited
the Applicant commenced employment with AGL Energy Limited in 2019. He was dismissed in 2024. the Applicant brought an application to the Fair Work Commission seeking an order for unfair dismissal. The Commission notes that the decision does not detail the specific reasons for the dismissal or the nature of the Applicant’s role.
the Applicant v Zhi Zhi Retail Pty Ltd
the Applicant applied to the Fair Work Commission for an unfair dismissal remedy. Zhi Zhi Retail Pty Ltd is the respondent. The Commission considered whether the Applicant’s application was lodged out of time and whether there were exceptional circumstances to justify an extension of time.
the Applicant v Kmart Australia Limited
the Applicant commenced employment with Kmart Australia Limited. The Fair Work Commission heard an application for an unfair dismissal remedy. The decision was published on 4 December 2025.
Application by the Applicant
the Applicant applied to the Fair Work Commission for an order to stop bullying. The application relates to cases AB2024/797, AB2024/819, AB2024/820, AB2024/821, and AB2024/822. The Fair Work Commission is not providing further details about the application.
Application by O'Brien Group Australia Pty Ltd Trading AS O'Brien Group Australia
O'Brien Group Australia Pty Ltd, trading as O'Brien Group, applied to the Fair Work Commission to vary a redundancy pay arrangement. The application relates to an employee who commenced new employment shortly after receiving a redundancy payment. The Commission considered previous decisions in similar cases, including *Australian Commercial Catering Pty Ltd v Powell, Marcelia & Togia, Maria* and *Application by Seaway HCO Pty Ltd T/A Seaway*.
the Applicant v Ironman Cranes Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced employment with Ironman Cranes Pty Ltd. The Fair Work Commission heard an application for an unfair dismissal remedy. the Commissioner heard the case. The decision was published on 2 October 2025.
Jessica Anahi Arreola v The Trustee For Holy Ship Unit Trust
the Applicant brought an application for an unfair dismissal remedy. The Fair Work Commission initiated a dismissal under section 587, due to a lack of prosecution of the case. the Respondent was the respondent. Deputy President Easton heard the matter.
the Applicant v Pek Care
the Applicant worked for Pek Care, a provider of aged care services. the Applicant commenced employment on 27 June 2023. He was dismissed from his position on 17 April 2024. the Applicant brought an unfair dismissal claim.
the Applicant v Tag Cares Foundation Limited
the Applicant brought an application for an unfair dismissal remedy against Tag Cares Foundation Limited. The Commission considered whether the application had reasonable prospects of success. The case number was U2025/12383.
the Applicant v Southern Cross Protection Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced employment with Southern Cross Protection Pty Ltd in 2023. He worked as a security guard. the Applicant lodged an application for an unfair dismissal remedy with the Fair Work Commission. The Commission considered the circumstances of his dismissal.
the Applicant v RSL Lifecare
the Applicant brought an application for an unfair dismissal remedy against RSL Lifecare. The Commission considered whether the application had reasonable prospects of success. the Deputy President, Easton DP, was involved in the decision.
the Applicant v Lysaght Building Solutions Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced employment with Lysaght Building Solutions Pty Ltd. The Fair Work Commission initiated dismissal proceedings under section 587, dismissing the application for an unfair dismissal remedy due to a lack of prosecution by the Applicant.
the Applicant v Repeta Plastics Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced employment with Repeta Plastics Pty Ltd. The Deputy President considered an application for an unfair dismissal remedy. The decision was published on 27 June 2025.
the Applicant v Strategic Collision Repair Group Pty Ltd
the Applicant, an employee, brought an application for an unfair dismissal remedy against Strategic Collision Repair Group Pty Ltd. The Fair Work Commission has not provided specific details about the events leading to the dismissal in this excerpt. the Deputy President heard the application.
Application by Regal Cabinets Pty Ltd
Regal Cabinets Pty Ltd, a building services company, applied to the Fair Work Commission to vary redundancy pay. The details of the application are not provided in the text. the Deputy President heard the application.
the Applicant v P.M.J. Operation's P.T.Y. L.T.D. Oonoonba
the Applicant commenced employment with P.M.J. Operations P.T.Y. L.T.D. Oonoonba. The company raised concerns about the Applicant’s conduct, which they alleged caused reputational damage to the business. They directed him to stop this conduct, but he refused. Following this, P.M.J. Operations terminated his employment. the Applicant then brought an unfair dismissal claim.
the Applicant v Speedshield Technologies Pty Ltd
the Applicant applied to the Fair Work Commission for an unfair dismissal remedy. Speedshield Technologies Pty Ltd is the respondent. The Commission found the Applicant’s application was not made in accordance with the Fair Work Act.
Teyon Loudon v WorkPac Pty Ltd Trading AS WorkPac
The Applicant commenced employment with WorkPac Pty Ltd as a labour hire employee at a mine site in 2023. The Fair Work Commission considered an application relating to a dispute about the operation of Part 2-7A of the Fair Work Act, concerning a regulated labour hire arrangement. The case number is C2025/2829.
Application by Fox & Gordon Pty Ltd T/A Montessori Early Years Learning and Care Centre
Fox & Gordon Pty Ltd T/A Montessori Early Years Learning and Care Centre sought to vary a redundancy pay determination. The company offered an employee an alternate casual role following a redundancy. The employee challenged whether this alternate role constituted acceptable employment for the purpose of calculating redundancy pay. The Fair Work Commission considered the loss of job security and other benefits associated with the employee’s previous permanent full-time position.
The Applicant v Above The Line Safety Solutions Pty Ltd
The Applicant commenced employment with Above The Line Safety Solutions Pty Ltd. The Fair Work Commission heard an application for an unfair dismissal remedy. Deputy President Lake presided over the case. The decision was published on 25 June 2025.
the Applicant v Precision Phone Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced employment with Precision Phone Pty Ltd. The Fair Work Commission heard an application for an unfair dismissal remedy. The decision was made by the Commissioner and a Deputy President. The case number was U2024/2864.
the Applicant v Matheson & Osman Pty. Ltd.
the Applicant commenced employment with Matheson & Osman Pty. Ltd. in 2022. He was dismissed from his role in November 2024. the Applicant brought an application for an unfair dismissal remedy to the Fair Work Commission.
Application by Mater Misericordiae Ltd Trading AS Mater
Mater Misericordiae Ltd, trading as Mater, applied to vary redundancy pay for a former employee. The Applicant was offered acceptable employment after their redundancy. They rejected this offer. Mater sought to reduce the Applicant’s redundancy pay to zero.
the Applicant v Rb Enterprises Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced employment with Rb Enterprises Pty Ltd. The details of his employment and the reasons for his dismissal are not detailed in the provided text. The Fair Work Commission heard an application for an unfair dismissal remedy.
the Applicant v Department of Transport and Planning
the Applicant commenced employment with the Department of Transport and Planning in 2019. He made an application to the Fair Work Commission concerning contraventions involving his dismissal. The Commission notes several previous decisions involving the Applicant and the Department.
the Applicant v Thales Training & Simulation Pty Limited
the Applicant commenced employment with Thales Training & Simulation Pty Limited. The Deputy President heard an application for an unfair dismissal remedy. The decision references previous cases, Lombardo, Stogiannidis and Appeal by Nulty. The document is an HTML file and the decision date is 2024-12-31.
the Applicant v We Are Gracie Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced employment with We Are Gracie Pty Ltd in 2023. The company operates a hospitality business. the Applicant made an application to the Fair Work Commission concerning contraventions involving her dismissal. Deputy President Clancy heard the application.
the Applicant v Bryden Industries Pty. Ltd. & the Respondent and Another
the Applicant commenced proceedings in the Fair Work Commission against Bryden Industries Pty. Ltd. and the Respondent. The case concerned an application to deal with contraventions involving dismissal. The Fair Work Commission case number was C2025/9380.
the Applicant v Brimbank City Council
the Applicant commenced an application for an unfair dismissal remedy against Brimbank City Council. The Fair Work Commission did not provide details of the events leading to the application.
the Applicant v Mason NSW Pty Ltd
the Applicant brought an application to the Fair Work Commission. The details of the application and the circumstances leading to it are not provided in the supplied text. the Commissioner heard the application. The case number is C2025/10213.
the Applicant v Coynes Freight Management Group Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced employment with Coynes Freight Management Group Pty Ltd. The Deputy President heard an application for an unfair dismissal remedy. The decision references several previous cases including Stogiannidis v Victorian Frozen Foods Distributors Pty Ltd and Long v Keolis Downer T/A Yarra Trams.
the Applicant v Aushield Pty. Ltd.
the Applicant brought an application to the Fair Work Commission concerning an unfair dismissal. The details of the events leading to the dismissal are not provided in the supplied text. The decision was made by the Commissioner and another Commissioner. The case number is U2025/11263.
the Applicant v D365.Global Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced employment with D365.Global Pty Ltd. The matter concerned an application for an unfair dismissal remedy. the Commissioner heard the application.
the Applicant v Tenowsue Holdings Pty Ltd & Curtin University
the Applicant commenced employment with Tenowsue Holdings Pty Ltd, trading as Curtin University, in 2021. He worked as a casual project officer. The Fair Work Commission was asked to deal with contraventions involving his dismissal. the Commissioner heard the application.
the Applicant v True Steel Frames Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced an application for an unfair dismissal remedy. True Steel Frames Pty Ltd is a company that manufactures steel frames. The Fair Work Commission considered whether the Applicant’s application was made in accordance with the Fair Work Act.
the Applicant v Yarra Valley Water Corporation
the Applicant brought an application to the Fair Work Commission seeking an unfair dismissal remedy. the Respondent was Yarra Valley Water Corporation. The Commission found the Applicant’s application was not made in accordance with the Fair Work Act.
Flynn James-Kirkwood v VIC Plumbing & Drainage Pty Ltd
Flynn James-Kirkwood commenced employment with VIC Plumbing & Drainage Pty Ltd. The Fair Work Commission considered an application for an unfair dismissal remedy. The Commission found the application had no reasonable prospects of success and was dismissed.
the Applicant v Bluescope Steel Limited
the Applicant commenced employment with Bluescope Steel Limited in 2018. He was dismissed from his role in 2024. the Applicant brought an application for an unfair dismissal remedy to the Fair Work Commission.
the Applicant v Department Of Justice Victoria
the Applicant brought an application to the Fair Work Commission seeking an unfair dismissal remedy. The Department of Justice Victoria was the respondent. The Commission did not grant an extension of time for the application and ultimately dismissed it.
the Applicant v Cubism Projects Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced employment with Cubism Projects Pty Ltd. The Fair Work Commission heard an application for an unfair dismissal remedy. The decision references cases including Peter Clark v The Trustee For Pausco Trust and Taulapapa, Ricky v Toll Personnel Pty Ltd. The document indicates the case number is U2025/5628.
the Applicant v The Trustee For The Nextt Health trust
the Applicant brought an application to the Fair Work Commission seeking a remedy for unfair dismissal. The Trustee For The Nextt Health trust was the respondent. The decision was made by Deputy President Saunders.
the Applicant v Lotus Commercial Pty Ltd
the Applicant brought an application for an unfair dismissal remedy against Lotus Commercial Pty Ltd. The Commission considered whether the application had reasonable prospects of success. The case was heard by the Commissioner and Deputy President O’Neill.
the Applicant v Home Care Footscray Pty Ltd
the Applicant, an employee, brought an application to the Fair Work Commission concerning his unfair dismissal from Home Care Footscray Pty Ltd. The Commission's decision is dated November 21, 2025. The case references a previous decision, Viavattene, Peter - [2013] FWCFB 2532.
Stuart Smith v Greater Western Water
the Applicant commenced an application for an unfair dismissal remedy against Greater Western Water. The Commission notes that the application was lodged after the relevant time limit. the Commissioner considered whether to grant an extension of time and ultimately dismissed the application, finding no exceptional circumstances to warrant an extension.
The Applicant v Support Solutions Group Pty Ltd Trading AS Townsville Support Solutions
The Applicant commenced employment with Support Solutions Group Pty Ltd, trading as Townsville Support Solutions, in 2023. The Deputy President heard an application concerning contraventions involving her dismissal. The case number was C2025/3764.
the Applicant v Krispy Kreme Australia Pty Limited
the Applicant commenced proceedings in the Fair Work Commission concerning an unfair dismissal from Krispy Kreme Australia Pty Limited. The case was identified as U2025/13245.
the Applicant v Seeley International Pty. Ltd.
the Applicant commenced work with Seeley International Pty. Ltd. in 2023. He was dismissed from his employment. the Applicant then applied to the Fair Work Commission for an unfair dismissal remedy. The Commission's decision is recorded as [2025] FWC 3483.
the Applicant v Nilkanth Fuels Pty Ltd
the Applicant brought an application for an unfair dismissal remedy against Nilkanth Fuels Pty Ltd. The Fair Work Commission considered whether to grant an extension of time, as the Applicant’s application was lodged outside the standard 21-day timeframe. The matter involved Deputy President Masson.
the Applicant v AHB Group Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced employment with AHB Group Pty Ltd. The Fair Work Commission heard an application for an unfair dismissal remedy. the Deputy President heard the case. The document provides metadata about the decision, including its publication date and case number.
the Applicant v Sydney Catholic Schools Limited
the Applicant commenced employment with Sydney Catholic Schools Limited in 2021. She was dismissed in 2024. the Applicant brought an application to the Fair Work Commission to deal with contraventions involving her dismissal. the Deputy President and a Cross DP heard the case.
the Applicant v Boulder Dash Entertainment Group pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced employment with Boulder Dash Entertainment Group pty Ltd. The Fair Work Commission heard an application for an unfair dismissal remedy. the Commissioner presided over the case. The document indicates this is decision [2025] FWC 3498, published on 21 November 2025.
the Applicant v Squadron Energy Services Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced work with Squadron Energy Services Pty Ltd. The Fair Work Commission considered an application for an unfair dismissal remedy. The Commission found the application had no reasonable prospects of success and dismissed it.
the Applicant v Central Queensland Services Pty Ltd
the Applicant, an employee, sought relief from an unfair dismissal. The Fair Work Commission considered an application relating to an unfair dismissal remedy. the Deputy President heard the application. The decision references a prior Full Bench decision, Central Queensland Services Pty Ltd v the Applicant ([2025] FWCFB 239).
the Applicant v EZYPAY SOLUTIONS PTY LTD & EZYREMIT WORLDWIDE PTY LTD
the Applicant brought an application to the Fair Work Commission concerning contraventions involving dismissal. The case involves EZYPAY SOLUTIONS PTY LTD and EZYREMIT WORLDWIDE PTY LTD. A Deputy President heard the application.
the Applicant v King Kira Industrial Services Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced employment with King Kira Industrial Services Pty Ltd in 2023. He was a labourer. the Applicant made an application to the Fair Work Commission seeking an order for an unfair dismissal remedy. The Commission notes that the Applicant did not provide a written submission. the Respondent provided a written submission.
the Applicant v Tradezone Pty Ltd
the Applicant commenced employment with Tradezone Pty Ltd. The Fair Work Commission heard an application for an unfair dismissal remedy. the Deputy President heard the case. The decision date was 31 December 2024.