s.365 - General protections

Application to deal with a general protections dismissal dispute - effective date of dismissal - whether 'dismissed'

• [1] Ms Isolde Kiriakoff was engaged for work on a temporary assignment with AJC Architects Pty Ltd (AJC) from 2 June 2025. On 2 October 2025, Ms Kiriakoff applied for the Commission to deal with a general protections dispute involving dismissal under section 365 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). Ms Kiriakoff alleges that she was dismissed on 11 September 2025 in contravention of the general protections after she complained of bullying by a colleague.

• [2] AJC objects to the application. It submits that Ms Kiriakoff was employed on a casual basis by Bespoke Architecture & Design Agency (Bespoke) with whom AJC contracted for Ms Kirakoff's services. AJC says Ms Kiriakoff was not an employee and could not have been dismissed by AJC. It also submits that the application is filed out of time because Ms Kiriakoff was dismissed by Bespoke on 8 September 2025.

• [3] On the evidence, Ms Kiriakoff was not dismissed. It is not in dispute that Ms Kirakoff was employed by Bespoke in connection with her work for AJC. She cannot, in those circumstances, have been dismissed by AJC. I find that her assignment with AJC came to an end on 11 September 2025 when AJC finally told Ms Kiriakoff it had no further work for her. Ms Kiriakoff remained an employee of Bespoke at this time. Although Bespoke 'closed off' her contract with AJC, Ms Kiriakoff remained on its books as a casual employee.

• [4] Brief exploratory discussions were held between Ms Kiriakoff and Bespoke in the week or so after 11 September 2025 about the prospect of Bespoke finding her other work. Ms Kiriakoff told Bespoke that she did not want to work with it anymore because of her experience at AJC. This was the action that brought the employment relationship to an end. There was no termination at the initiative of the employer, and there is no submission or evidence to establish that Ms Kiriakoff was forced to resign.

• [5] The application is dismissed under s.587(1)(a).

Ms J Bicknell of Bicknell Law & Consulting for the respondent.

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer