Al-Hakim v Toyoor Al Jannah Pty Ltd

The applicant, Al-Hakim, brought proceedings against Toyoor Al Jannah Pty Ltd (the first respondent), and two other respondents, alleging various contraventions of the *Fair Work Act 2009* (Cth) and an applicable award. The central dispute concerned the applicant's employment status at the commencement of her engagement, whether she was an employee or an independent contractor, and subsequent alleged breaches by the first respondent relating to superannuation contributions, payment of accrued annual leave upon termination, and the provision of payslips. The applicant also alleged that the second and third respondents were involved in these contraventions. The matter was heard by Judge Manousaridis in the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia.

The court was required to determine several key legal issues. Firstly, it needed to ascertain whether the applicant was initially engaged as an employee or an independent contractor, and if any misrepresentation was made regarding her status. Secondly, the court had to decide if the applicant was covered by the relevant award for the entire period of her engagement. Thirdly, the court considered whether the first respondent contravened section 45 of the *Fair Work Act* by failing to make superannuation contributions, and section 44 of the *Fair Work Act* by not paying accrued annual leave upon termination. The court also had to determine if the first respondent contravened section 340 of the *Fair Work Act*, and whether the applicant was dismissed or voluntarily resigned. Finally, the court examined whether the first respondent contravened section 536 of the *Fair Work Act* by failing to provide payslips, and if the second and third respondents were involved in any of these alleged contraventions.

Judge Manousaridis found that no misrepresentation was made regarding the applicant's initial engagement, and that she voluntarily resigned from her employment. The court determined that the applicant was covered by the award for the entire period of her engagement. Consequently, the court found that the first respondent contravened section 45 of the *Fair Work Act* by failing to make superannuation contributions and section 44 of the *Fair Work Act* by not paying accrued annual leave upon termination. The court also found a contravention of section 536 of the *Fair Work Act* for the failure to provide payslips. The court further found that the second and third respondents were involved in the first respondent's contraventions of sections 44, 45, and 536 of the *Fair Work Act*. The court made orders for the first respondent to pay the applicant the outstanding superannuation contributions, accrued annual leave, and for the provision of payslips, and ordered the second and third respondents to pay pecuniary penalties for their involvement in the contraventions.