A partly completed form was not enough to kill a jurisdictional objection
An employer's partly completed response form sparked a Full Bench appeal - and handed it a procedural win.
Aurecon Australasia had a Fair Work Commission certificate thrown out on October 21, 2026, after a Full Bench found the Commission skipped a threshold question it was required to answer first: had the worker actually been dismissed?
The worker filed a general protections application on June 23, 2026, claiming she had been constructively dismissed - meaning she resigned, but says the employer's conduct left her no real choice. She alleged the dismissal was a form of adverse action taken because she had exercised workplace rights.
Aurecon pushed back. In its formal response, the company argued the worker had not been constructively dismissed at all. She resigned voluntarily, the company said, and if there was no dismissal, the entire application was "jurisdictionally flawed."
Here is where it gets procedural - and interesting.
The response form includes a section asking whether the employer objects to the Commission holding a conference on jurisdictional grounds. Question 5.1 is a simple yes-or-no tick box. Aurecon left it blank.
But in the very next field - question 5.2, which asks what the objection is - the company spelled out its position: the worker was not dismissed, she resigned.
The Commission listed the matter for a conciliation conference anyway. No party...
This article was also published in REDESCover, DDIA’s weekly newsletter. Click here to subscribe and get the next edition delivered straight to your inbox. With just over two weeks until the Novem...