GIEC GLOBAL says small firms face justice gap in court rules

GIEC GLOBAL Australia is pressing a broader debate over whether very small companies should be able to represent themselves more easily in workplace disputes. The issue comes as Australia prepares a new Fair Work Court and considers whether current corporate representation rules are fair to micro-businesses that cannot afford private lawyers.

Why it matters: - Australia’s corporate representation rules can force micro-businesses to hire lawyers before they can defend themselves, even when the business has only a few employees and little cash on hand. - The issue is especially important as the federal government moves to create a new Fair Work Court aimed at making workplace disputes simpler, fairer and faster. - The question is whether access to justice should depend on a company’s size and finances, not just its legal status as a corporation.

What happened: - GIEC GLOBAL Australia raised concerns that the default rule requiring corporations to proceed through a lawyer can create an access-to-justice gap for financially stressed small businesses. - On 23 July 2026, the Australian Government announced plans for a new specialist Fair Work Court. - The government said the existing workplace dispute system can be costly, complex and slow, and noted that some cases can take more than two years. - The government also said legal costs should not exceed the value of the claim in some matters.

The details: - Under rule 4.01 of the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Division 2) (General Federal Law) Rules 2025, an individual may appear with or without a lawyer, while a corporation generally must proceed through a lawyer. - Rule 4.01(2) of the Federal Court Rules 2011 says a corporation must not proceed other than by a lawyer. - Both courts have dispensing powers that allow exceptions in appropriate cases. - The Federal Circuit and Family Court can dispense with compliance under rule 1.10, and the Federal Court has a comparable power under rule 1.34. - In practice, the default is legal representation for corporations, and a director or other non-lawyer usually needs court approval to act for the company. - A corporation can also mean a small family business with two or three employees, one working director, and no HR department, company lawyer or litigation budget. - The representation rule does not distinguish between a micro-business and a large corporation based on turnover, headcount or ability to pay for legal help. - In Fair Work matters, section 570 of the Fair Work Act 2009 limits when one party can be ordered to pay another party’s legal costs. - Costs can be ordered in specified cases, including where proceedings were brought vexatiously or without reasonable cause, or where an unreasonable act or omission caused costs. - That structure can leave a small business paying tens of thousands of dollars to defend a matter and still bearing its own legal expenses even after winning. - The Fair Work Commission’s Workplace Advice Service can provide free legal assistance for qualifying employees and small-business employers. - Small-business employer eligibility generally requires fewer than 15 employees, no in-house legal, workplace relations or HR staff, no lawyer or paid agent, and other conditions. - The service is limited to certain matters, including dismissal, general protections, workplace bullying and sexual harassment, and depends on appointment availability. - The article argues that this support is not the same as having a lawyer through a full Federal Court process involving pleadings, evidence, interlocutory applications, mediation and a final hearing. - The article also notes that section 190 of the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia Act 2021 calls for disputes to be resolved justly, quickly, inexpensively and efficiently, with costs proportionate to importance and complexity. - The article points to rule 31.12 of the 2025 General Federal Law Rules, which allows an authorised officer or employee of a corporation to represent the company in a Fair Work small claims proceeding.

Between the lines: - The argument is not that professional lawyers are unnecessary, but that a one-size-fits-all rule can produce uneven results for tiny companies and large corporations. - Federal Court Chief Justice Debra Mortimer has also discussed the growth in self-represented litigants and the cost barriers faced by people and companies. - That broader judicial concern supports the idea that current representation rules may be too rigid for financially strained businesses. - The article frames the policy issue as one of proportionality: whether requiring full legal representation is realistic and fair in every case. - A more flexible model could let an authorised director handle procedural steps, file documents, attend case-management events and participate in mediation, while leaving complex trials and heavy evidentiary disputes to lawyers. - The article says such a system could also help avoid a situation where a company must spend further money just to win permission to participate in its own case.

What’s next: - The proposed Fair Work Court creates a policy opening for the federal government and courts to revisit how micro and small businesses appear in workplace disputes. - Any reform could consider employee count, turnover, available funds, estimated legal fees, the amount in dispute, litigation complexity and the capability of the proposed director. - A faster process for representation applications could reduce delays and prevent parties from losing procedural rights while waiting for a ruling. - The article says the best outcome would preserve employee protections while giving financially stressed small businesses a realistic chance to defend themselves.

The bottom line: - Australia’s court rules already recognize that corporate self-representation can be appropriate in limited Fair Work matters. - The next reform debate is whether that flexibility should extend further for micro-businesses that cannot afford private lawyers but still need a fair chance to be heard.