An employer must pay a former worker more than $50,000 after a tribunal found it contributed to her post-natal depression by making her redundant just as she was requesting maternity leave.
A judge has shot down an ER manager's bid to represent her employer in an adverse action case in which she is accused of criminal behaviour, observing that her own interests might "colour" her ability to effectively perform the role.
A leading university has been ordered to pay more than $600,000 in compensation and penalties to an accountant managed-out after being described by her supervisor as "poisonous to the team environment".
The FWC has refused to hear the out-of-time unlawful termination case of a teacher allegedly "forced" into taking maternity leave, finding her confusion over the dismissal date, a delay caused by filing the wrong claim and a difficult birth did not amount to exceptional circumstances.
A senior FWC member has cited the ubiquity of "incomplete [or] incorrect" applications received by the tribunal in rejecting a regulatory body's $36,000 costs bid against a former employee who mistakenly claimed discrimination on the basis of s-x.
A worker sacked over performance and conduct issues has failed to establish a connection with his mental disability or that his employer took adverse action on the basis of his bullying complaints.
A Jehovah's Witness's ineptitude and expectation he should be treated "deferentially" at work, rather than any religious discrimination, resulted in his dismissal from a labouring job after seven weeks, a court has found.
In an "unusual" case examining whether the workplace right to make an inquiry extends to prospective employees, the Federal Court has acknowledged "real difficulties" in applying existing provisions to contract negotiations.
A casual worker has won an extension of more than 100 days to file a general protections claim after the Federal Circuit Court found he reasonably acted on incorrect FWO advice and filed his claim in the wrong court.
A full Federal Court has upheld the dismissal of a senior lawyer who publicly criticised government clients of his firm, finding that repeatedly disobeying reasonable directions to desist trumped his right to express a political opinion.