Wells v Locarno Management Pty Ltd [2008] FCA 1034
The first respondent applied illegitimate pressure amounting to duress to Ms Sinclair in connection with an Australian Workplace Agreement in contravention of s 400(5) of the Workplace Relations Act 1996 (Cth); an agreed penalty is within the permissible range and appropriate in the circumstances.
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 15 July 2008
- Procedural Posture
- Application for Pecuniary Penalty / Judgment on Settlement and Penalty
- Outcome
- Penalty imposed on first respondent; proceeding otherwise dismissed; no order as to costs.
- Legal Topics
- ['duress in Employment' 'australian Workplace Agreements' 'penalties Under Workplace Relations Act 1996']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Application for Pecuniary Penalty / Judgment on Settlement and Penalty
Legal Issues
- 1 ['Whether first respondent applied duress to an employee in contravention of s 400(5) of the Workplace Relations Act 1996 (Cth)' 'Appropriate penalty for contravention']
Ratio Decidendi
The first respondent applied illegitimate pressure amounting to duress to Ms Sinclair in connection with an Australian Workplace Agreement in contravention of s 400(5) of the Workplace Relations Act 1996 (Cth); an agreed penalty is within the permissible range and appropriate in the circumstances.
Court Disposition
Penalty imposed on first respondent; proceeding otherwise dismissed; no order as to costs.
Orders
- ['A penalty of $3,300 be imposed on the first respondent for contravention of s 400(5) of the Workplace Relations Act 1996 (Cth).' 'The first respondent pay the said penalty to the Consolidated Revenue within 21 days.' 'The proceeding otherwise be dismissed.' 'There be no order as to costs.']
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment