Qld law firm fails to stop unfair dismissal complaint

A Queensland law firm has failed for the second time to shut down a paralegal’s unfair dismissal application.

The Fair Work Commission tossed a second attempt by Doessel Group to prevent a fired paralegal from pursuing a complaint she was unfairly dismissed from MyCRA Lawyers in March 2024.

Following what was alleged to be a “difficult” seven months, Joanna Pascua – a Philippine native – said she was unfairly terminated over a false claim she copied company information to her personal drive.

Pascua alleged Doessel Group installed software without her knowledge, which allowed someone to access her device remotely.

Last October, Doessel Group argued Pascua was engaged as an independent contractor and not as an employee, and the Fair Work Commission could not hear an unfair dismissal complaint.

Deputy president Tony Slevin dismissed the jurisdictional objection. The substantive application has yet to be determined.

In a decision published last week, vice president Mark Gibian, deputy president Richard Clancy, and deputy president Thomas Roberts refused permission for Doessel Group to appeal Slevin’s findings.

Doessel Group contended Slevin erred by finding Pascua was an employee because Pascua was responsible for the equipment used for her work, had the capacity to control how she managed her workload, and, to a certain extent, could set the hours she worked.

The company also claimed the agreement between the two used the term “independent contractor” 52 times, compared with the five times it used the terms “employee” or “key employee”.

Doessel Group also submitted Pascua could not be an employee because she lives and works in the Philippines and has never held a work visa that would enable her to perform work in Australia.

On the question of the employee versus contractor, Gibian, Clancy, and Roberts said there was not a “sufficiently arguable case of appealable error” to justify granting permission to appeal.

They dismissed an argument Slevin erroneously applied amended provisions as being “without merit”, and found there was no relevance in Doessel Group’s argument about Pascua’s location.

“Except perhaps to the extent that the location of the work contemplated by the contract might affect the degree of the contractual control or the nature of the work contemplated by the contract, the fact that Pascua in fact performed work in the Philippines is irrelevant to the character of the relationship created by the Independent Contractor’s Agreement,” they found.

Further, because the question of whether Pascua was engaged outside of Australia was not considered in detail by Slevin, it was not in the public interest to grant an appeal on that ground.

The case is Doessel Group Pty Ltd v Ms Joanna Pascua - [2025] FWCFB 43.