Top 03 Sydney Case in Review: Wilson v Care Park Pty Ltd

Sydney Case in Review | Dismissing an injured worker via email after months of silence isn’t just poor management; it’s a legal liability.

Download Procedure

In this recent Fair Work Commission (FWC) decision, an employer was ordered to pay compensation after a dismissal process described as “manifestly inadequate.”

Managing injured workers is complex, but the rules around procedural fairness remain clear. As this case demonstrates, employers who fail to maintain contact or provide a valid reason for termination; even when they suspect misconduct; leave themselves open to significant penalties.

The Incident: Injury and Alleged Misconduct

The case involved a parking patrol officer employed by Care Park Pty Ltd. In November 2024, the worker was struck by a vehicle while issuing a ticket in a Launceston car park, sustaining a knee injury.

The situation quickly became contentious. The employer disputed the workers’ compensation claim, arguing the injury was non-compensable because the worker had allegedly engaged in “serious and wilful misconduct” by causing a traffic hazard. Police initially issued an infringement notice to the worker, though this was later quashed by a magistrate.

Complicating matters further, the employer alleged the worker’s wife had admitted he was suffering from memory loss and mood swings, raising suspicions of dementia. The wife disputed this interpretation, attributing his symptoms to injury-related medication.

The “Ghosting” and Dismissal

Following the dispute over liability, the worker’s weekly compensation payments ceased. He expected contact from his employer but received none.

When the worker eventually emailed to ask if he was still employed, the employer’s response was non-committal, effectively inviting him to resign if he wanted his annual leave paid out. The worker did not resign.

Months later, in June 2025, the employer sent an email confirming the termination of his employment because he was unable to fulfil his duties and had “no foreseeable return-to-work prospects.”

What the Fair Work Commission Found

FWC Deputy President Ian Masson rejected the employer’s argument that the worker had abandoned his employment. The Commission noted that the worker had asked a legitimate question about his employment status and received a “non-response.”

The Deputy President was scathing in his assessment of the employer’s conduct, noting a “troubling and inexcusable disinterest” in the worker’s welfare.

The Commission found:

• • No valid reason: The dismissal was harsh, unjust, and unreasonable.

• • Procedural failure: The worker was not notified of the reason for dismissal prior to the email and was given no opportunity to respond.

• • Manifestly inadequate manner: The process of dismissal was fundamentally flawed.

Despite the worker’s age (70) and ongoing incapacity limiting his potential future employment to roughly 12 weeks, the FWC ordered the employer to pay him over $8,000 in compensation.

Critical Lessons for Employers

This case serves as a stark reminder for businesses managing ill or injured workers:

1. 1. Silence is not a strategy: You cannot simply stop communicating with an injured worker and assume they have abandoned their employment.

1. 1. Injury management is a proactive duty: Employers must actively manage the return-to-work process. “Disinterest” in a worker’s welfare is looked upon poorly by courts and tribunals.

1. 1. Procedural fairness is non-negotiable: Even if a valid reason for termination exists (such as genuine medical incapacity), you must still follow a fair process. This includes notifying the worker of the reason and giving them a chance to respond.

For more information on employer obligations regarding dismissal and unfair practices, refer to the Fair Work Commission’s guide on unfair dismissal.

Need Help Managing Complex WHS Claims?

Navigating the intersection of injury management, safety compliance, and employment law can be difficult. If you need guidance on your safety systems or return-to-work obligations, speaking with experienced OHS consultants can help you avoid costly legal pitfalls.

At HSE Direct, we specialise in helping businesses build robust safety and compliance frameworks.

• • Looking for tools to help you manage safety? Download our checklists and guides at our Free Resources page.

• • Stay updated on the latest safety news: Follow us on Instagram @hse_direct for daily tips and case law updates.