Court accepted the dismissal was about suitability, not sick leave
A food and beverage manager sacked at noon on his first shift back from medical leave has lost his bid for compensation under the Fair Work Act.
On 6 May 2026, the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia dismissed Christopher Murphy's claim against Aspen Living Villages, which operates the Darwin FreeSpirit holiday resort. The timing of his dismissal looked damning. The outcome did not match the optics.
Murphy started as Food and Beverage Manager on 26 July 2023 on a permanent full-time basis, subject to a six-month probation. On 13 October 2023, he submitted a medical certificate that declared him unfit for work from 12 October to 16 October 2023 inclusive, and he took approved personal leave for that period. He was not rostered on 17 or 18 October 2023. When he walked in for his next shift on 19 October 2023, his manager Laura McArthur met with him around midday and handed him a termination letter.
Murphy sued, arguing he was fired because he took personal leave and because he exercised his right not to work while on that leave. He also initially claimed he had been dismissed for making a bullying complaint about the assistant property manager, Bron Dalton, but he dropped that allegation at hearing after tendering an amended statement of claim with handwritten amendments crossing out the relevant paragraphs.
The court accepted that the dismissal was adverse action. The question was why it happened. Judge Liveris focused on McArthur's reasoning, and the timeline she built well before the medical certificate landed.
From mid-August 2023, staff began approaching McArthur distressed, saying they felt bullied and undermined by Murphy. On 3 September 2023, when no staff turned up to open the bar and multiple workers called in sick, McArthur rang Murphy on his day off. He told her he had plans and could not help. She drove in, opened the bar, organised staff and worked through until the night shift arrived.
By 28 September 2023, McArthur sat Murphy down for what she described as a conversation, not a formal review. She told him he had no rapport with staff, that workers were calling in sick because of how he spoke to them, and that he needed to fix his relationship with assistant manager Bron Dalton. She kept typed notes. In cross-examination, she conceded Murphy was never given verbal warnings, written warnings or formal grievances, and that no documents from the meeting were supplied to him.
Crucially, on 11 October 2023, two days before Murphy submitted his medical certificate, McArthur had already formed the view that he was not capable of performing the role. She cited his failure to respond to emails, his unwillingness to lead the department, and his aggressive refusal to accept feedback.
That finding was reinforced by an earlier entry. At the weekly operations meeting on 3 October 2023, the minutes recorded: "Chris Murphy seems to have checked out - not replying to emails and doesn't seem to care. Will schedule meeting with him later in the week to discuss his suitability for the role." That entry pre-dated his sick leave.
Murphy disputed the paperwork. He argued the termination letter's metadata showed it was created on 15 November 2023, after Aspen knew he intended to sue. He also pointed to a text from McArthur during his leave asking him to "make sure you organise coverage", arguing he was being told to work while medically unfit. The court accepted McArthur's evidence that the request was confined to asking him to try to arrange cover by phone or text, not to physically attend work, and accepted she drafted the termination letter from a precedent document on the morning of 19 October 2023.
The judge also flagged that Murphy had used generative AI to prepare his outline of submissions, which contained incorrect citations and referred to authorities that did not exist. Judge Liveris described it as a serious matter, particularly where the use of AI was not disclosed, the material was not verified, and no certification as to accuracy was given.
Ultimately, Judge Liveris found Aspen had discharged the reverse onus under s 361(1) of the Fair Work Act and shown the dismissal was for broad and multifaceted performance and suitability reasons, not because Murphy took personal leave or exercised his right not to work while on leave. The application filed on 20 December 2023 was dismissed.
The case is a reminder that contemporaneous file notes, meeting minutes and emails can carry more weight than a formal performance improvement plan. It also shows that timing optics matter: dismissing an employee on their first day back from certified sick leave will invite scrutiny, even where the underlying reasons are legitimate and pre-date the leave.
