A professor dismissed by the University of Melbourne for allegedly sending a student romantic texts and a photo of himself in his boxers has won his job back. The Fair Work Commission also awarded the German national over $28,000 for his unfair dismissal, noting that he was harshly fired for conduct that took place seven years earlier.
Texts from the professor to the student reviewed by the Commission showed how the duo’s relationship quickly became intimate, before it ended with an accusation of sexual harassment.
The 55-year old professor at one point mentioned that as a German, swimming “naked in the swimming pool” and having his mother supply him with contraceptives at age 12 were part of a national culture where “anything goes.”
Let’s look at how this unfair dismissal case – Stephan Matthai v The University of Melbourne [2025] – unfolded and why the Commission decided the professor was unfairly treated.
Dismissed professor wins reinstatement after student relationship
Dr. Stephan Matthai immigrated from Germany in 2015 to take up a role at the University of Melbourne. He became chair of reservoir engineering at the university and began supervising a foreign-born PhD student. The student was referred to in Fair Work Commission proceedings as AB.
The events that led to his dismissal began at a birthday party in May 2017. It was there that the then 55-year-old professor began speaking to AB about how he had recently split from his partner. He told her how the split was causing him suffering. The next day, AB sent him a poem that she had written and they began exchanging messages. The professor insisted on using their personal emails so as to bypass the university’s security.
‘We are like the dry soil soaking up the autumn rain’: Professor gets poetic
The duo’s messages soon became intimate. In one message, Dr. Matthai said they had been missing so much in their lives and that they were “like the dry soil soaking up the autumn rain after a long hot summer.” He went on to say that their relationship was “very beautiful” and that it “caresses” their souls.
However, the professor texted that he was “barely” coping with the guilt of causing his recent breakup. He said that he was a “construction site” and needed time to heal. That said, Dr. Matthai went on to say that they should focus on “the now” and offered to FaceTime later that evening.
The next day, he texted AB saying “lets inhabit fully what we do, enjoy, live the dynamics of the now.” The professor said that they should let these dynamics propel them to the “next stage,” while being careful not to engage in “unwholesome actions.” He then ended his text by saying that their FaceTime the previous night was “a moment of bliss.”
Professor sent photo of himself in boxers
This happened while he and AB were discussing body types. Dr. Matthai told the Fair Work Commission that he did so because he was feeling “unworthy and abandoned” and needed positive feedback. He also claimed that he wanted to demonstrate to AB that he was an ectomorph.
In another text exchange examined during the unfair dismissal hearing, AB asked, “Can I love you German professor?”. The professor replied, “You do not need my permission, do you?” He argued to the Fair Work Commission that he was being facetious, but the Commission said that the only response he should’ve given was a “clear negative.”
‘My mum gave me contraceptives when I was 12’: Professor gives insight into German culture
During this period of texting, Dr. Matthai messaged AB at 1am one morning saying “I am burning.” Other texts included the professor asking AB about her “love languages” and asking her to go swimming with him. He also complimented AB’s body, saying “you do not look 39, you look younger.”
At the unfair dismissal hearing, the Fair Work Commission found that AB had allegedly attempted to strip during a FaceTime call, which Dr. Matthai had stopped. He also messaged her, “And I come from the German culture – anything goes, naked in the swimming pool. My mum gave me contraceptives when I was 12…”
Relationship hit the rocks, uncovered years later
Later in 2017, AB told another professor that she no longer wanted Dr. Matthai as her PhD supervisor. She met with the University of Melbourne’s HR team, but did not make a formal complaint. She was later assigned a new supervisor.
Years later, in early 2024, AB contacted the university alleging that Dr. Matthai had sexually harassed her in 2017. He was sent a list of allegations and in response explained that he was not romantically interested in AB, but didn’t want to hurt her feelings.
The Professor cooperated with the investigation, providing all the private messages that he sent to AB. He told University of Melbourne that the claim he had pursued a romantic relationship with AB was “simply wrong.”
This sexual harassment allegations were subsequently dismissed by an external investigator. However, the investigation found that the professor’s texts to AB were unprofessional, inappropriate and “overly personal.” Dr. Matthai admitted to the university that he had breached its Appropriate Workplace Behaviour Policy.
The university considered this to be serious misconduct and fired him. Feeling he had been unfairly terminated, Dr. Matthai lodged an unfair dismissal claim with the Fair Work Commission.
Professor argued misconduct was unjustly brought up years later
Dr. Matthai argued to the Fair Work Commission that his messages to AB in 2017 constituted out of hours conduct. He therefore contended that University of Melbourne could not use his messages as a reason for dismissal. He also argued that the university’s use of his private messages was a breach of his right to privacy. He submitted that the dismissal was unfair because it happened seven years after the alleged misconduct, during which time Dr. Matthai had an “unblemished record.”
The professor also highlighted the fact that AB had alleged to University of Melbourne in 2024 that he had “sextually and mentally” abused her. She had also claimed that he asked her to enter a sexual relationship with him. Dr. Matthai noted to the Commission that the university had not levelled these or any other allegations of sexual harassment to him.
He claimed that the university had instead raised other matters to him, which had not been part of AB’s complaint. He said that it had considered these matters in 2017 and 2018 and had removed him as AB’s supervisor. The professor argued that it was unfair to raise these matters again many years later.
Meanwhile, the University of Melbourne argued that Dr. Matthai’s misconduct had a “substantial” connection to work. It said this was due to the “significant” power imbalance between a professor and AB, a “vulnerable” foreign student. The university pointed to Dr. Matthai’s admission that he had acted “wilfully” in contravention of the Appropriate Workplace Behaviour Policy.
The university also highlighted the fact that the professor had deliberately moved his conversations with AB to private channels. In addition, the university said that the professor was wrong to say that it had dealt with the matter in 2017 and 2018. This was because it did not know about his inappropriate messages with AB until 2024.
The university took into account Dr. Matthai’s statement that he was going through a rough patch while he was messaging AB. However, it said that this wasn’t an excuse for acting inappropriately and didn’t lessen the severity of his misconduct. The university also pointed out to the Commission that Dr. Matthai’s dismissal was the result of a fair process. It said that it came after an external investigation and that he was given ample opportunity to respond to the allegations and the reason for his sacking.
Fair Work rejected argument that messages were out of hours
At Dr. Matthai’s unfair dismissal hearing, the Fair Work Commission found that an academic supervisor’s relationship with a PhD student is “intrinsically in the domain of work”. The Commission said that it didn’t make sense to speak of out of hours conduct in this case. This was because working hours “can be any hours on any day”. He found that when Dr. Matthai communicated with the student “he wore only one hat. . . It was a University of Melbourne hat.”
However, the Commission favoured Dr. Matthai’s argument that he had not intended to enter a romantic relationship with AB. It accepted that he did not want to hurt her feelings and that he tried to manage her expectations when AB told him she had romantic feelings. But the Commission said the professor did this “ineptly.” When AB told him this, he should have “categorically” told her that there should not be a relationship at all.
Slammed for ‘mawkish, romantic’ texts, but student also blamed
While the professor’s inability to put a stop to the texts was noted by the Fair Work Commission, it also concluded that AB was a “willing” participant. It highlighted the fact that the professor derived comfort and affirmation from her attention, singling out a particular text.
He had texted AB that he felt old and unattractive. When she replied saying he was attractive, he then texted “You think others do as well?” The Commission concluded that Dr. Matthai put his own emotional needs “before those of AB.” It also scolded him for continuing to “use mawkish, romantic language” and discuss intimate topics.
Professor should have paid attention to ‘alarm bells’
The Fair Work Commission said that AB’s messages contained “alarm bells” which should have been heed by the professor to discourage any romantic interest in him. It said that his interactions with AB should have been work-related and that he should have “scrupulously” avoided any suggestions of intimacy. It was noted that, however, the professor continued to message AB in intimate and inappropriate terms.
The Commission also found that Dr. Matthai had done himself a “disservice” by arguing that his conduct was private. However, it did acknowledge that he had accepted what he did was wrong and was genuinely sorry.
Valid reason for dismissal, but ultimately unfair
In the end, the Fair Work Commission concluded that the professor’s dismissal was unfair, even though his misconduct was a valid reason for termination. This was because it deemed it harsh to sack him for misconduct that occurred years ago. Also, because Dr. Matthai had an unblemished record at the university since that time.
The Commission also came to this decision after considering that he had been deprived of the chance of seeking a new job at the age of 55, rather than at 62. It found that the university’s seven-year delay in taking action “made good” on the damage the professor caused to the employment relationship.
In finding his dismissal was unfair, the Commission ordered University of Melbourne to reinstate him to his position and pay him $28,098.12.
Have you been unfairly dismissed?
A Whole New Approach is Australia’s leading employee advocacy service, specialising in unfair dismissal, workplace bullying, harassment, discrimination, redundancies and more.
With over 30 years’ experience and more than 16,000 claims handled nationwide, we know how to fight for your rights and secure the compensation you deserve.
Strict Fair Work Commission time limits apply to claims, so don’t delay. Call 1300 766 700 today and let us stand with you in protecting your workplace rights.
