Two founders of a Melbourne meal-kit delivery firm who were dismissed with a “total disregard’ for procedural fairness have each won $84K. In their Fair Work unfair dismissal claims, the duo detailed how the firm’s board had “contrived” reasons to terminate their employment. One of the founders had undergone a liver transplant, was denied sick leave pay then sacked about a month later.
In this article, we’ll look at the events of this unfair dismissal VIC case Mr. John Cincotta v Pepperleaf.Com.Au Pty Ltd; Simon Kahil v Pepperleaf.Com.Au Pty Ltd [2025]. We’ll also explore another recent Fair Work unfair dismissal claim. In this one, a hospitality employer was found to have a valid reason to sack a worker, but the termination was deemed unfair due to a severe lack of procedural fairness.
Melbourne-based John Cincotta and Simon Kahil founded subscription-based meal kit delivery company Pepper Leaf in 2014. In 2019, they engaged internet marketing firm Rewardle to provide operational services. Four years later, the company acquired a 54% stake in Pepper Leaf for $1.5 million. As part of this acquisition, two Rewardle directors joined the Pepper Leaf board, with one appointed chair and granted a casting vote.
New employment contracts were put in place, setting the founders’ annual salaries at $168,000 each. Mr. Cincotta would act as Chief Operating Officer and Simon Kahil as Chief Executive Officer. The arrangement also included a $1.5 million loan from Pepper Leaf to Rewardle, and a $110,000 loan from Rewardle to each of the founders. These loans were initially due for repayment by 30 October 2024. This coincided with an agreement for the founders to earn out their remaining shareholding over twelve months.
However, in 2024 Pepper Leaf began experiencing significant cash flow difficulties. This led to Mr. Cincotta and Mr. Kahil being paid far less than their contracted salary. In his Fair Work unfair dismissal claim, Mr. Cincotta said that he was forced to use his personal savings to help keep the business afloat.
The relationship deteriorated sharply towards the end of 2024. After Rewardle failed to repay its $1.5 million loan by the October 2024 due date, the Rewardle directors, leveraging the casting vote, approved a resolution to extend the loan repayment date to October 2030. Simultaneously, they directed the founding directors to repay their individual $110,000 loans.
Adding to these woes, in December 2024 Mr. Kahi was hospitalised for a serious medical condition that resulted in a liver transplant. Pepper Leaf denied him payment of sick leave, then not long after, both founders were suspended for “potentially” serious misconduct. They were accused of taking unauthorised director loans and expenses for personal benefit. The duo were also alleged to have deleted company records. Mr. Khail specifically was accused of refusing to immediately hand over top-level administrative access to key company software accounts.
On 30 January 2025, Pepper Leaf informed Mr. Cincotta and Mr. Kahil of their termination of employment. They both subsequently lodged Fair Work unfair dismissal claims.
The founders argued to the Fair Work Commission that the reasons for their termination of employment were “contrived.” They said that Mr. Kahil’s continued work despite ill health and their financial commitment to the business “challenges” the idea that they committed serious misconduct. The duo claimed that the disputed director loans were fully disclosed. They denied deleting company records, admitting only to deleting private correspondence.
The founders argued that their termination of employment was orchestrated without any procedural fairness. They pointed to the lack of any adequate forewarning that their behaviour was deemed unsatisfactory prior to their suspension. They were not provided with an opportunity to respond to the allegations, which remained vague until after the suspension. The duo suggested their termination of employment was predetermined.
The founders’ Fair Work unfair dismissal claims were collectively heard by the Fair Work Commission in October 2025. It took aim at Pepper Leaf’s evidence, noting that screen shots presented in submissions were “unreadable.” The evidence also did not prove that the alleged serious misconduct occurred. The Commission was not satisfied that the alleged transactions were unauthorised or for personal benefit. Nor was the deletion of records proven.
Meanwhile, Mr. Kahil’s temporary delay in handing over admin rights was rectified before the sacking and was not considered a justifiable reason for summary termination of employment.
The Fair Work Commission found a “total disregard” for procedural fairness. The founders were not properly notified of the reasons for their termination of employment. Nor were they given an opportunity to respond to the allegations before the decision was made. The Commission noted that the Rewardle directors, particularly the chair, had acted in a manner that was “somewhat dictatorial.”
The Commission also noted that the conduct leading to the termination of employment occurred only after the Rewardle directors unilaterally amended the loan terms, causing severe financial strain on the founders. The fact that the founders worked while seriously ill, didn’t draw a salary and invested personal funds was inconsistent with the claims of serious misconduct, the Commission found. It therefore ruled that they had been unfairly dismissed. Pepper Leaf was ordered to pay Mr. Cincotta and Mr. Kahil $84,000 each.
Another recent example of a sacking that lacked any procedural fairness was depicted in the unfair dismissal NSW case Scott Matthew Ashburner v St Marys Rugby League Club Ltd [2024]. Scott Ashburner started working for Western Sydney’s St. Marys Rugby League Club as a casual bar attendant and cashier in April 2022. Mr. Ashburner’s termination of employment stemmed from his repeated use of profanity and conflicts with colleagues.
The conflict resulted in Mr. Ashburner complaining to management in February 2023 about the hostile workplace caused by two colleagues, Kiara Gray and Tara O’Cass. He alleged that they were spreading false and degrading sexualised rumours about him in the workplace. Following this, Mr. Ashburner had multiple verbal altercations with the duo.
On 8 March 2023, he admitted to telling Ms. O’Cass to get the “f*ck out of the way”. The next month, Ms. Gray filed a written complaint alleging that he had repeatedly shouted at her to “get out” of the bar while they were on shift. The most serious misconduct involved another colleague, Demi-Lee Measures. Another colleague, Kiara Gray, had previously told Mr. Ashburner that she had been subjected to sexual harassment by a manager. In May 2023,
Ms. Measures alleged that Mr. Ashburner said to her, “you’re acting like Kiara, why don’t you go get molested like her too?” Ms. Measures also complained that he made comments and jokes about Ms. Gray being molested. In June 2023, Mr. Ashburner had a meeting with HR to discuss the complaints made against him. He subsequently filed an antibullying application with the Fair Work Commission, naming Ms. Gray. He also made a written complaint about Ms. Gray to St. Marys Rugby League Club. On 21 June 2023, Mr. Ashburner was fired. His termination of employment was backdated to 20 June 2023.
In his Fair Work unfair dismissal claim, Mr. Ashburner argued to the Fair Work Commission that his termination of employment was completely devoid of procedural fairness. He asserted that he was never given notification that his conduct was being viewed as misconduct. Nor was he advised what specific policy or contractual terms he was alleged to have breached. Mr. Ashburner also claimed that he was never given the chance to respond to the reasons for her termination of employment.
Mr. Ashburner highlighted several relevant mitigating factors, including the significant negative economic effects of the dismissal given his age and poor employment prospects. Furthermore, he claimed he had been treated differently to Ms. Gray. He alleged that her spreading of “sexualised rumours” amounted to workplace bullying, and that she had not faced an investigation or disciplinary action.
St. Marys Rugby League Club argued to the Fair Work Commission that Mr. Ashburner had deserved to be fired for causing ongoing workplace conflict and breaching its sexual harassment and workplace bullying policies. Refuting the arguments made in his Fair Work unfair dismissal claim, the club argued that procedural fairness had been afforded. It contended that his claim was an “opportunistic and defensive” response to a complaint against him.
St. Marys Rugby League Club further submitted that Mr. Ashburner had fair job prospects as Sydney was a highly populated area with significant job opportunities. The club also countered the claim of differential treatment by asserting that Ms. Gray was also dismissed for her comments.
The Fair Work Commission heard Mr. Ashburner’s unfair dismissal NSW claim in February 2024. It found that St. Marys Rugby League Club did have a valid reason for his termination of employment. It noted that his conduct, including the molestation comment, constituted sexual harassment. The Commission also found that his swearing at colleagues amounted to workplace bullying, which justified the decision to sack him.
However, the Commission found that St. Marys Rugby League Club’s had denied him procedural fairness. It noted that he was not given an opportunity to respond to the reason for his dismissal prior to the decision being made. He was also not told that his behaviour constituted misconduct. Nor was he told that it was breach of his contract of employment or the club’s sexual harassment and workplace bullying policies. The Commission noted that the allegations put forward to Mr. Ashburner were “vague assertions.”
The Fair Work Commission noted that St. Marys Rugby League Club was a business of “considerable size” that had dedicated HR staff. It therefore said that it had no excuse for the procedural fairness deficiencies. The Commission took aim at the club’s investigations into the allegations made against Mr. Ashburner. It said that these were “deficient” and “ad hoc,” with the process lacking transparency and procedural fairness.
St. Marys Rugby League Club’s HR manager even admitted to the Commission that no investigation had been conducted into three separate incidents relied upon to terminate Mr. Ashburner. The Commission noted that Mr. Ashburner was not explicitly told his job was at risk until his dismissal meeting. It said the decision to terminate his employment “had already been made” prior to this meeting. Mr. Ashburner was not warned prior to this meeting that his job was at risk. Nor was he given the chance to show cause as to why he shouldn’t be sacked. Mr. Ashburner was also not provided any evidence obtained during the investigation to justify his sacking.
The Fair Work Commission determined that St. Marys Rugby League Club’s inaction in resolving the “escalating tension” between Ms. Gray and Mr. Ashburner had a role to play in the latter’s termination of employment. Ultimately, the Commission found that whilst a valid reason existed, the“significant” procedural fairness deficiencies rendered his termination of employment unfair. The Commission also took into account other factors such as the economic impact of the sacking on Mr. Ashburner.
A remedy was not ordered as the two parties had not “adequately addressed” this aspect of Mr. Ashburner’s Fair Work unfair dismissal claim.
Read more: Fair Work: Dismissed Worker’s ‘C**t’ Slur Was Appeal to ‘Karmic Intervention’
Australian Workplace Discrimination Representatives is here to help workers stand up for their rights. Whether you’ve been unfairly dismissed, bullied, discriminated against, sexually harassed or unfairly deactivated, we’ll guide you through the Fair Work process.
If you’ve been dismissed, time is critical; you only have 21 days to lodge your Fair Work unfair dismissal claim. Missing that deadline can cost you your entire case. That’s why we offer a free, confidential first consultation to help you act quickly. Don’t wait. Contact us now on 1800 333 666.
