Basi v Namitha Nakul Pty Ltd

The case of Basi v Namitha Nakul Pty Ltd involved claims by the applicants, Mr Midhun Basi and Mr Syed Haider, against the respondents, Namitha Nakul Pty Ltd and Mr Vaisakh Mohanan Usha. The applicants alleged contraventions of various sections of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) (FW Act) and the Restaurant Industry Award 2010 (Award) relating to their employment terms and conditions. The applicants sought, among other things, payment on a quantum meruit basis for work performed and relief in respect of alleged contraventions of the FW Act by the respondents.

The legal issues before the court included whether Mr Haider was entitled to a quantum meruit payment for work performed at the Nowra Restaurant, the application of section 557C of the FW Act to the proceedings, the accuracy of payslips, the nature and classification of the applicants' duties, compliance with break requirements, the arrangement of working hours, and payment of amounts due under the Award. The court was also required to determine whether alleged loans made by Mr Usha to the applicants were indeed loans, or whether they were properly characterised as "cashback payments," and whether there were contraventions of the FW Act concerning these payments and other obligations.

The court found that Mr Haider was indeed entitled to a quantum meruit payment for the work he performed at the Nowra Restaurant. It determined that section 557C of the FW Act did not operate in the proceedings to limit the applicants' ability to recover unpaid wages. The court concluded that the applicants did not work 12-hour days without breaks and that the respondents failed to arrange the applicants' hours of work in a manner consistent with the Award and failed to pay weekend holiday rates, which constituted serious contraventions of the Award and the FW Act. Furthermore, the court found that Mr Usha was knowingly involved in these contraventions. The court also established that no loans were made by Mr Usha to the applicants but that demands for cashback payments and other payments were made in contravention of the FW Act. Finally, the court found that Mr Haider was entitled to a quantum meruit payment for the work he undertook to prepare the Nowra Restaurant for trading.

The court ordered the parties to provide agreed draft declarations and orders to give effect to the reasons for judgment. In the event of no agreement, each party was required to file and serve draft declarations and orders proposing to be made by specific dates. The applicants and respondents were also required to file written submissions regarding penalties and any affidavit evidence by specified dates. The proceeding was listed for a case management hearing.