Buckley and Secretary, Attorney-General's Department

Buckley (the applicant) sought an advance under the *Fair Entitlements Guarantee Act 2012* (Cth) following the insolvency of his employer. The applicant had sustained a work-related injury and received workers' compensation payments. His employment concluded not directly due to the employer's insolvency, but because the employer was unable to provide suitable light duties following the injury. The decision under review, which denied the advance, was considered by Mrs J C Kelly, Senior Member, of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant's employment termination was a consequence of the employer's insolvency, as required by section 15 of the *Fair Entitlements Guarantee Act 2012* (Cth) for eligibility for an advance. This involved determining if the inability to provide light work constituted a termination *due to* the employer's insolvency, or if it was a separate cause for the cessation of employment.

The Senior Member reasoned that the *Fair Entitlements Guarantee Act 2012* (Cth) requires a direct causal link between the insolvency and the termination of employment. In this instance, the employment ended because the employer could not provide light duties, a situation arising from the applicant's injury, rather than directly from the employer's financial inability to continue employing him. The Tribunal affirmed the original decision, finding that the factual circumstances did not meet the statutory threshold for an advance under the Act.