A senior lawyer from a community legal centre who alleged she was terminated because of her age was prevented from advancing a claim relating to unfair dismissal before the Fair Work Commission.
Fair Work Commission deputy president Nicholas Lake refused to grant an extension of time to allow a former senior solicitor of Gold Coast Community Legal Centre to advance a general protections application.
The solicitor alleged her age was a factor in the decision to end her employment in July 2025, but Gold Coast Community Legal Centre claimed her contract was not renewed due to performance concerns.
The general protections application was lodged five days outside of the 21-day statutory time frame, with the solicitor claiming it was due to representative error and the emotional shock of her termination.
On the former, the solicitor claimed the firm she engaged did not tell her about the 21-day deadline and advised her to attempt private negotiations prior to lodging a Fair Work claim.
About a fortnight after the first meeting, the firm allegedly told the solicitor it did not hold instructions to file the application and should be engaged to do so, otherwise she could file it herself.
The solicitor submitted that she mistakenly lodged an incorrect form and filed a new one, only to be told by the commission that the first would need to be discontinued before the second could be accepted.
The solicitor discontinued both but failed to lodge the further and supposedly “correct” application until the following afternoon.
Lake did not accept her argument of representative error.
“The applicant is not a lay person. She is a solicitor. I appreciate that she does not practise employment law. However, I have no doubt she understands the effect of the limitation and understands the courts and tribunals will require applications to be made using the correct form,” Lake said in his decision, published late last month.
The commission noted the solicitor’s concession that she was aware of the 21-day deadline, regardless of whether the firm informed her.
Lake added it was not clear why one of the first applications – an unfair dismissal application – was an “error”, given the procedural fairness matters she raised could substantiate the claim.
Turning to her submission of mental distress, Lake acknowledged the solicitor would have experienced “shock and distress” following the news that her employment would be ending.
However, he was not satisfied on the material before him that it prevented the solicitor from correctly lodging an application.
As for the merits of the application, Lake said it was “not without” merit but was a neutral factor in the extension of time application.
Naomi Neilson is a senior journalist with a focus on court reporting for Lawyers Weekly.
You can email Naomi at:
