Fair Work Ombudsman v Albert (No 3)

In the matter of Fair Work Ombudsman v Albert (No 3), the court was required to determine the appropriate pecuniary penalties to be imposed on each of the respondents for their contravention of section 500 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth). The case involved Messrs Albert, Hynes, and Ravbar, officers of the Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union (CFMMEU), who had entered a construction site under the guise of their entry permits and allegedly hindered or obstructed certain individuals. The court needed to decide the amount of penalty and whether to impose personal payment orders on the second and third respondents.

The court considered several factors in determining the appropriate penalty, including the nature and seriousness of the contraventions, the need for deterrence, and the personal circumstances of the respondents. The court noted that the respondents had prior contraventions, held senior positions, and their conduct was deliberate. The court also considered the principle of parity, which suggested that it was not appropriate to order personal payment from the second and third respondents. Ultimately, the court imposed pecuniary penalties on each of the respondents, with personal payment orders for the second and third respondents, prohibiting them from seeking or receiving financial benefits related to the penalties from the CFMMEU.

The court's decision was based on the principles of deterrence and the need to ensure compliance with the Fair Work Act. The court emphasised that civil penalties serve primarily to deter repetition of the contravention by the contravenors and others who might be tempted to contravene the Act. The penalties imposed were intended to reflect the seriousness of the contraventions and to promote compliance with the law.