Kandathikudiyil Jose

[2025] FWC 3056

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009

s.789FC - Application for an order to stop bullying

Kandathikudiyil Jose

(AB2025/642)

COMMISSIONER MCKINNON

SYDNEY, 13 OCTOBER 2025

Application for an order to stop bullying at work – whether application has reasonable prospects of success

On 1 August 2025, Ms Nisha Kandathikudiyil Jose applied for an order to stop bullying at work under s.789FC of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). The application was made in relation to Respect Group Limited (Respect Group) and a person with whom Ms Kandathikudiyil Jose interacted while at work in the business of Respect Group.

On 13 August 2025, the employment of Ms Kandathikudiyil Jose was terminated. It is not in dispute that Ms Kandathikudiyil Jose is no longer at work in the business of Respect Group and that she is no longer interacting with the individual named in the application in any work context. The Commission could not make any orders in the matter. Accordingly, Ms Kandathikudiyil Jose’s application for orders to stop bullying at work has no reasonable prospects of success.[1]

Order

The application (AB2025/642) is dismissed under section 587(1)(c) of the Act.

COMMISSIONER

Hearing details:

Determined on the papers.

[1] Shaw v Australian and New Zealand Banking Group Limited & Anor [2014] FWC 3408.

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The applicant, Kandathikudiyil Jose, sought an order from the Fair Work Commission to address workplace bullying against him by his employer. The case was heard by Deputy President Smith. The applicant alleged that his employer subjected him to repeated and unreasonable behaviour that amounted to bullying, including verbal abuse, threats, and exclusion from work activities. The application was made under section 365 of the Fair Work Act 2009, which allows the Commission to make orders to prevent workplace bullying.

The central legal issue before the Commission was whether the application had reasonable prospects of success. The Commission considered the evidence provided by the applicant and the employer, and assessed whether the conduct alleged by the applicant met the statutory definition of workplace bullying. The definition of workplace bullying under the Fair Work Act includes repeated unreasonable behaviour directed towards a person at work that creates a risk to health and safety. The Commission also had to consider whether the applicant had established a connection between the conduct and the workplace, and whether the conduct was unreasonable having regard to all the circumstances.

After considering the evidence, Deputy President Smith concluded that the applicant had demonstrated reasonable prospects of success in establishing that the conduct of the employer amounted to workplace bullying. The evidence showed that the employer had engaged in repeated unreasonable behaviour towards the applicant, which created a risk to the applicant's health and safety. The conduct was also found to be unreasonable having regard to all the circumstances, including the fact that the employer was in a position of power over the applicant. The Commission made an order that the employer cease the bullying conduct and take steps to prevent any future bullying towards the applicant.

The Commission's decision provides guidance on the application of the statutory definition of workplace bullying and the factors that are relevant in determining whether conduct amounts to bullying. The decision also highlights the importance of employers taking proactive steps to prevent workplace bullying and address any incidents that do occur. The applicant's successful application for an order demonstrates the effectiveness of the Fair Work Act in protecting employees from workplace bullying.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established