Documentation, decision-making, and the real cost of dismissal
When Technology One dismissed its Victorian regional manager in 2016, it documented everything. A decade later, that decision was vindicated in the Federal Court.
Behnam Roohizadegan was Technology One's Victorian regional manager when the company ended his employment in 2016. He alleged it was unlawful – adverse action under the Fair Work Act – and pursued claims against both the company and its founder and then-CEO, Adrian Di Marco, spanning discrimination, workplace complaints, and a total demand exceeding $55 million.
He had reason for confidence, at first. At the original trial, Justice Kerr found in his favour and awarded him approximately $5.2 million. Technology One appealed. The Full Court ordered a retrial. And this time, the result was the opposite. On 18 December 2025, Justice McElwaine dismissed the case entirely.
The court found that Technology One had solid, documented grounds for the termination: poor financial performance, an inability to accept changes to the management structure following a new direct superior's appointment in October 2014, poor interaction with subordinates, and flatline licence fee revenue. A key internal email from April 2016 crystallised the collapse of trust between Roohizadegan and Di Marco.
"The contemporaneous evidence weighed heavily in favour of the valid reasons that Technology One gave for terminating the applicant," Justice McElwaine wrote.
That evidence,...
By Ivan Kesic A drone strike on an electrical generator just outside the inner perimeter of the Barakah Nuclear Power Plant in the United Arab Emirates on May 17, 2026, suddenly brought the Persia...