Budathoki v Consult Security Pty Ltd

The applicant, Mr Budathoki, brought proceedings against Consult Security Pty Ltd (the first respondent), Ms. S. K. Singh (the second respondent), and Mr. R. K. Singh (the third respondent) concerning alleged employment. The dispute centred on whether Mr Budathoki was an employee or an independent contractor, and if an employee, whether he was full-time or casual. The proceedings also involved claims for unpaid loadings for shift work, weekend work, and public holidays, as well as other alleged contraventions of the applicable award and the *Fair Work Act 2009* (Cth). The matter was heard by Burchardt J in the Federal Court of Australia.

The primary legal issues before the Court were to determine the true nature of the relationship between Mr Budathoki and Consult Security Pty Ltd, specifically whether he was an employee or an independent contractor. Consequential to this, the Court was required to ascertain whether Mr Budathoki was employed on a full-time or casual basis. Furthermore, the Court had to determine if Consult Security Pty Ltd had contravened the relevant award and the *Fair Work Act 2009* (Cth) by failing to pay appropriate loadings for shift, weekend, and public holiday work, and to assess the liability of the respondents for these contraventions.

Burchardt J found that all issues raised against the first respondent, Consult Security Pty Ltd, were established. The Court determined that Mr Budathoki was an employee, and that the company had contravened the award and the *Fair Work Act 2009* (Cth) by failing to pay him the correct entitlements. The third respondent, Mr R. K. Singh, was found to be fully liable pursuant to section 550 of the *Fair Work Act 2009* (Cth). The second respondent, Ms S. K. Singh, was held liable for the contraventions up until the point she ceased her material involvement with the affairs of the first respondent.