A Melbourne solicitor, Mitchell Fuller, has been denied reinstatement after being dismissed for taking sick leave during a football trip to Adelaide. Fuller travelled to attend the AFL’s Gather Round on April 4, 2024, despite being scheduled to work that Friday and the following Monday. He took two sick days, claiming on the Friday that he was unwell and unable to come into the office, and later stated he was still feeling unwell on the Monday.
To support his claims, he provided a medical certificate from an online provider and made a statutory declaration of his illness. However, his position unraveled when a human resources consultant discovered social media posts showing Fuller enjoying his weekend at football matches and socialising at the beach and local pubs.
His employers, Madison Branson Lawyers, terminated his employment, accusing him of submitting a false statutory declaration based on the evidence obtained. Fuller subsequently filed an unfair dismissal claim with the Fair Work Commission. However, Deputy President Andrew Bell ruled against him, stating that Fuller was unable to prove his illness and that the real reason he could not work was due to his pre-planned trip. Bell noted, “I am not satisfied he was sick or unfit to work,” emphasising that Fuller provided no evidence to substantiate his claims beyond his own assertions.
Fuller did mention that he has attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and was experiencing medication shortages at the time, which affected his focus and energy levels. A letter from his doctor, dated two months post-termination, noted that he was feeling unwell without his medication on the day he took sick leave.
In the period following his dismissal, Fuller ran as a Greens candidate in local government elections but was unsuccessful. By the time of his hearing at the Commission, he had been unemployed for 19 weeks. Bell concluded that Fuller’s behaviour fundamentally conflicted with the values of integrity and honesty essential for a solicitor and determined that reinstatement was not appropriate in this case.