Brisbane’s Dundas Lawyers® advises employers and companies throughout Australia on a range of employment law issues to ensure their rights are upheld and their obligations are accurately documented. Our specialists apply our in-depth knowledge of all aspects of the legislative framework of employment law to ensure our clients receive timely and accurate advice.
Employment law expertise
Our Brisbane based Lawyers advise throughout Australia on:
- dispute mediation;
- employment agreements including:
- award and non-award-based positions;
- contract for service (Contractor’s Agreements);
- directors agreements;
- executive level agreements; and
- volunteers agreements.
- employment agreements for collectives:
- enterprise agreements including employee share option schemes; and
- enterprise bargaining.
- general protections claims;
- organisational policies and procedures;
- performance management and disciplinary action;
- restraint of trade clauses and the extent to which they are enforceable;
- surveillance in the workplace;
- trade secrets;
- training for management and staff;
- transmission of business;
- workplace health and safety; and
- workplace incident investigations and internal complaint handling.
Our interest in technology has also seen us advising employment issues in the context of social media.
Disclaimer
This page contains general commentary only about employment law for employers. You should not rely on the commentary as legal advice. Specific legal advice should be obtained to ascertain how the law applies to your particular circumstances.
Why choose Dundas Lawyers®?
Having exerted Blood Sweat and Years® since April 2010 we are the team you want on your side for the long term to act as the ‘bodyguard’ for your business to complete legal forensic investigations and case preparation. Some of the reasons clients choose Dundas Lawyers® include:
- our Uncommon business acumen;
- our Uncommon expertise in transactional, compliance and litigious matters;
- our Uncommon expertise forensic case preparation;
- our Uncommon customer focus;
- the fact that we don’t just know law, we know business!
- how we leverage our Uncommon Nous® to provide client centric solutions.
Considering getting a lawyer to advise your business?
For a confidential, no obligation initial telephone call to find out how we can help your business gain an uncommon advantage in employment law for employers, please phone our team on either 1300 386 529 or 07 3221 0013.
Malcolm Burrows B.Bus.,MBA.,LL.B.,LL.M.,MQLS.
Legal Practice Director
T: +61 7 3221 0013 (preferred)
M: +61 419 726 535
E: mburrows@dundaslawyers.com.au
Complete the form below and we will respond to your enquiry within one (1) business day from the moment you press Submit.
Employment law for employers enquiry
Legislation
- Corporations Act 2001 (Cth)
- Corporations Regulations 2001 (Cth)
- Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (Cth)
- Competition and Consumer Regulations 2010 (Cth)
- Equal Opportunity for Women in the Workplace Act 1999 (Cth)
- Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth)
- Fair Work Regulations 2009 (Cth)
- Racial Discrimination Act 1975 (Cth)
- Racial Discrimination Regulations (Cth)
- Sex Discrimination Act 1984 (Cth)
- Sex Discrimination Regulations 1984 (Cth)
- Sex Discrimination Regulations 2018 (Cth)
Recent insights about employment law for employers
-
Bequeathing units and shares to a testamentary discretionary trust
A testamentary discretionary trust will (TDT) can be an effective vehicle for holding and managing assets for beneficiaries under a will. That said, the fact that an asset can be left to a TDT does not mean that the transfer of the asset, or subsequent dealings with it, will necessarily be straightforward. Shares in a…
-
Mere puffery vs misleading and deceptive conduct – where is the line
In the case of Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v TPG Internet Pty Ltd [2013] HCA 54 (ACCC v TPG), the High Court of Australia (High Court) drew a distinction between mere puffery and representations with the intention of marketing. This article explores the decision in ACCC v TPG and the distinction between puffery and…
-
Contractual and equitable obligations of confidence
This is an update to the article “Full Court clarifies confidentiality of supplier and contact info” published by Dundas Lawyers on 24 February 2026. On 20 April 2026, the Full Court of the Federal Court of Australia (Court) allowed an appeal in the case of New Aim Pty Ltd v Leung (No 4) [2026] FCAFC…
-
AI evidence misleading Court: Ba v Sterling Parts Australia
On 17 June 2026, Symons J delivered judgment in the case of Ba v Sterling Parts Australia Pty Ltd [2026] FedCFamC2G 1245 (Ba v Sterling Parts). Ba v Sterling Parts was a proceeding brought by Weiman Ba (Applicant) in the second division of the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Court). Symons J dismissed…
-
Individual Flexibility Arrangements: an overview
Modern awards and enterprise agreements set out the minimum terms and conditions of employment for most Australian workers performing different roles. The Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) (Act) provides a mechanism by which an employer and an individual employee may, by agreement, adjust the operation of certain terms in their Award to better suit theircircumstances. …
-
White-Anting: An employer’s lawful termination guide
Employees who use White Anting tactics to deliberately undermine management or disrupt workplace harmony may be summarily dismissed, provided the relevant legal conditions are met and a proper process is followed. Following our 28 April 2026 article “White Anting: serious misconduct?“, this article provides practical “how to” steps for employers to lawfully dismiss employees who…
-
White Anting: serious misconduct?
White Anting is an Australian term meaning to sabotage, undermine, or destroy an organisation, project, or person from within. White Anting in the workplace often involves the quiet, insidious undermining of a colleague or superior through gossip, withholding information, exclusion, or spreading doubt. White Anting has been recognised by psychologists as a psychosocial hazard and…
-
The “right to disconnect” from modern workplaces
The right to disconnect, as contained in Part 8 of the Fair Work Amendment (Closing Loopholes No. 2) Bill (Bill), gives employees the right to refuse contact from their employers (or related parties) outside of their working hours, unless the refusal is unreasonable. The changes in Part 8 amend various sections of the Fair Work…
Recent Federal Court decisions regarding employment law for employers
-
EFEX Group Pty Ltd v Bennett [2023] FCA 508
INDUSTRIAL LAW —– application under s 562 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) and s 23 of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) for order in the nature of prohibition directed at the Fair Work Commission restraining it from continuing to hear an unfair dismissal claim under s 394 of the Fair Work…
-
Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union v Fair Work Ombudsman (Boggo Road Cross River Rail Case) [2023] FCA 507
INDUSTRIAL LAW – appeal against quantum of penalties – where respondent conceded three grounds of appeal – where primary judge erred in finding homophobic conduct – appeal allowed – redetermination of penalties – where conduct was deliberate and churlish – where discount for utilitarian value of admissions and co-operation – where second and third appellants…
-
Murdock v Virgin Australia Airlines Pty Ltd (No 2) [2023] FCA 569
INDUSTRIAL LAW – conduct said to be in breach of various terms of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) – alleged steps taken by the respondents in issuing directions that employees receive vaccinations to inoculate them against COVID-19 and subsequent termination of the applicants from their employment as a result of failing to comply with…
