Case Note: Johnson v PaperCut Software Pty Ltd [2026] FWC 178

Case Summary

Johnson v PaperCut Software Pty Ltd [2026] FWC 178

The Commission considered the terms of the contract, including that it stipulated that Mr Johnson must “comply with such reasonable and lawful directions and all policies, rules and regulations from time to time provided by PaperCut”.  In doing so the Commission found that:

• The company had and used their discretion appropriately and acted within the scope of the contract by directing the work at the office
• Mr Johnson did not have an unconditional right to work from home
• The company took appropriate steps to transition to and explain the new working arrangements; and
• The company gave the appropriate prior warnings.
• The Commission also considered the fact that by 25 February 2022, the Victorian Government had removed its strong recommendation for employees to work from home and was instead encouraging the return to offices following the pandemic and the actions of the Company were consistent with this.
• Mr Johnson had not made any requests to the company for flexible working arrangements, nor did he identify any personal reason why he could not comply with the policy or why the Company should consider a specific flexible working arrangement for him based on a specific reason (such as had been in other cases where family responsibilities required work from home).
• Therefore, the Commission was satisfied of a valid reason for the dismissal and Mr Johnson was found not to have been unfairly dismissed.

Key Takeaway Points

If your employer has requested a return to the office or implemented a policy requiring the same after previous hybrid/remote working conditions and you wish to challenge the same, consider:

• Whether your employment contract gives your employer the discretion or flexibility to update your working conditions, such as the location from which you work (most employment contracts are drafted in away to allow for this);
• Making a formal request for flexible working arrangements suited to you with evidence of why it is required (must be more than just a personal preference to work from home, such as parental or carer responsibilities); and
• Be aware that flexible working arrangements may only be granted where particular circumstances or criteria apply to you, but is not a guaranteed right.

How Sharrock Pitman Legal can assist

While the opportunity to WFH suits many employees (and employers, too), for various reaons,  this case demonstrates that well-drafted workplace policies together with clearly understood expectations, are essential to minimising the likelihood of a dispute arising.

As Accredited Specialists in Commercial Litigation and expertise in Employment Law, our legal team advises employers on workplace policies and workplace agreements. We also assist employees to navigate the complexities of workplace regulations.

If you require assistance, please do not hesitate to contact us on (03) 9560 2922 or email sp@sharrockpitman.com.au.

‍

The information contained in this article is intended to be of a general nature only and should not be relied upon as legal advice. Any legal matters should be discussed specifically with one of our lawyers.

Liability limited by a scheme approved under Professional Standards Legislation.‍