Butlin v ACA Home Improvements Pty Ltd
Case
•
[2019] FCCA 2145
•6 August 2019
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Butlin v ACA Home Improvements Pty Ltd [2019] FCCA 2145
[2019] FCCA 2145
6 August 2019
CaseChat Overview and Summary
In *Butlin v ACA Home Improvements Pty Ltd*, the applicant, Mr. Butlin, brought proceedings against ACA Home Improvements Pty Ltd and its director, Mr. Anthony Carbone, alleging contraventions of section 358 of the *Fair Work Act 2009* (Cth). The matter was heard by Judge Blake in the Federal Circuit Court of Australia.
The court was required to determine whether the respondents had contravened section 358 of the *Fair Work Act 2009* (Cth), which deals with the prohibition of misrepresentations about workplace rights. Furthermore, the court had to consider the appropriate penalty for the contraventions and whether compensation should be awarded to the applicant for both economic and non-economic loss.
Judge Blake found that ACA Home Improvements Pty Ltd and Mr. Carbone were accessorial liable for the contraventions of section 358. The court reasoned that the respondents had made misrepresentations to Mr. Butlin regarding his entitlements under a modern award. In determining the penalty, the court considered the seriousness of the contraventions and the need for deterrence. The court awarded compensation to Mr. Butlin for economic loss suffered as a result of the misrepresentations.
The court was required to determine whether the respondents had contravened section 358 of the *Fair Work Act 2009* (Cth), which deals with the prohibition of misrepresentations about workplace rights. Furthermore, the court had to consider the appropriate penalty for the contraventions and whether compensation should be awarded to the applicant for both economic and non-economic loss.
Judge Blake found that ACA Home Improvements Pty Ltd and Mr. Carbone were accessorial liable for the contraventions of section 358. The court reasoned that the respondents had made misrepresentations to Mr. Butlin regarding his entitlements under a modern award. In determining the penalty, the court considered the seriousness of the contraventions and the need for deterrence. The court awarded compensation to Mr. Butlin for economic loss suffered as a result of the misrepresentations.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Employment Law
-
Statutory Interpretation
Legal Concepts
-
Breach
-
Damages
-
Penalty
-
Remedies
-
Statutory Construction
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Cases Citing This Decision
0
Cases Cited
11
Statutory Material Cited
2
Dafallah v Fair Work Commission
[2014] FCA 328
Dafallah v Fair Work Commission
[2014] FCA 328
Richardson v Oracle Corporation Australia Pty Ltd
[2014] FCAFC 82