Sayed v Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union [2015] FCA 338

Sayed v Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union [2015] FCA 338

Penalties should be imposed on the respondent for each of the three contraventions of s 351 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) because the respondent's adverse actions were, in part, because of the applicant's political opinion. Each act (redeployment, suspension, dismissal) was a separate incursion into unlawful conduct, not merely a manifestation of a single course of conduct. Penalties are to be significant and paid to the Commonwealth, not the applicant, to avoid a windfall contrary to the compensation structure and public interest rationale of the Act.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
13 April 2015
Procedural Posture
Pecuniary Penalty Application (fair Work) / Determination of Penalty After Liability Judgment
Outcome
Penalties imposed on the respondent for three contraventions of s 351, with penalties to be paid to the Commonwealth.
Legal Topics
['adverse Action' 'discrimination on the Basis of Political Opinion' 'penalties Under Fair Work Act' 'general Deterrence']
['industrial Law'] ['adverse Action' 'discrimination on the Basis of Political Opinion' 'penalties Under Fair Work Act' 'general Deterrence']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Pecuniary Penalty Application (fair Work) / Determination of Penalty After Liability Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether penalties should be imposed on the respondent for contraventions of s 351 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth)' 'Whether the contraventions should be treated as separate or as one course of conduct for penalty purposes' 'Appropriate quantum of penalty for each contravention' 'Whether penalties should be paid to the applicant or the Commonwealth']

Ratio Decidendi

Penalties should be imposed on the respondent for each of the three contraventions of s 351 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) because the respondent's adverse actions were, in part, because of the applicant's political opinion. Each act (redeployment, suspension, dismissal) was a separate incursion into unlawful conduct, not merely a manifestation of a single course of conduct. Penalties are to be significant and paid to the Commonwealth, not the applicant, to avoid a windfall contrary to the compensation structure and public interest rationale of the Act.

Court Disposition

Penalties imposed on the respondent for three contraventions of s 351, with penalties to be paid to the Commonwealth.

Orders

  • ['Respondent to pay penalty of $20,000 for the contravention by redeploying the applicant.' 'Respondent to pay penalty of $10,000 for the contravention by suspending the applicant.' 'Respondent to pay penalty of $15,000 for the contravention by dismissing the applicant.' 'Penalties to be paid to the Commonwealth on...