X -v- Y & anor [2000] NSWADT 122

X -v- Y & anor [2000] NSWADT 122

The Tribunal was satisfied on the balance of probability that the Second Respondent engaged in a course of unwelcome sexually implicit conduct towards the Applicant during her employment, persisted despite her rejection, and used his apparent authority at the Motel to influence her. The conduct was directed at the Applicant because she was female and contravened Section 24(1)(a) of the Anti-Discrimination Act 1977. The First Respondent failed to prove that it did not authorise the conduct, and was therefore liable under Section 53 and in breach of Section 25(1)(a) and Section 25(1)(c). The Second Respondent caused and permitted the First Respondent's unlawful breach, making both...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
01 September 2000
Procedural Posture
Sexual Harassment in Workplace Complaint/enquiry / Principal Matter
Outcome
Complaint upheld; First Respondent and Second Respondent held jointly and severally liable and remedies ordered.
Legal Topics
['sexual Harassment' 'workplace Discrimination' 'employer Liability' 'compensation' 'apology']
['anti Discrimination Law' 'employment Law'] ['sexual Harassment' 'workplace Discrimination' 'employer Liability' 'compensation' 'apology']

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

Sexual Harassment in Workplace Complaint/enquiry / Principal Matter

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Second Respondent engaged in unwelcome sexually implicit conduct towards the Applicant while she was employed at the Motel, contrary to Section 24(1)(a) of the Anti-Discrimination Act 1977.' "Whether the First Respondent was liable for the Second Respondent's discriminatory actions by virtue of Section 53 of the Anti-Discrimination Act 1977." 'Whether the First Respondent was in breach of Section 25(1)(a) and Section 25(1)(c) of the Anti-Discrimination Act 1977.' 'Whether the First Respondent and Second Respondent were jointly and severally liable for the unlawful discriminatory conduct.' 'What remedies, including compensation and apology, should be ordered.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal was satisfied on the balance of probability that the Second Respondent engaged in a course of unwelcome sexually implicit conduct towards the Applicant during her employment, persisted despite her rejection, and used his apparent authority at the Motel to influence her. The conduct was directed at the Applicant because she was female and contravened Section 24(1)(a) of the Anti-Discrimination Act 1977. The First Respondent failed to prove that it did not authorise the conduct, and was therefore liable under Section 53 and in breach of Section 25(1)(a) and Section 25(1)(c). The Second Respondent caused and permitted the First Respondent's unlawful breach, making both...

Court Disposition

Complaint upheld; First Respondent and Second Respondent held jointly and severally liable and remedies ordered.

Orders

  • ["The Second Respondent, within seven days of receiving written advice from Mrs X's solicitors of this direction, to send to Mrs X a letter of apology for his acts of sexual harassment towards her while she was employed at the Motel. The Second Respondent shall send that apology by certified prepaid post addressed...