Fair Work Ombudsman v Ozkorea Pty Ltd
Case
•
[2018] FCCA 2350
•24 August 2018
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Fair Work Ombudsman v OzKorea Pty Ltd [2018] FCCA 2350
[2018] FCCA 2350
24 August 2018
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The Fair Work Ombudsman brought proceedings against Ozkorea Pty Ltd in the Federal Circuit Court of Australia, alleging contraventions of the *Fair Work Act 2009* (Cth) and the *Fair Work Regulations 2009* (Cth). The dispute concerned Ozkorea's failure to pay minimum entitlements to employees under the Cleaning Services Award 2010, specifically in relation to minimum wages, and its failure to keep proper records.
The central legal issue before Judge McNab was whether Ozkorea, as a head contractor, was knowingly concerned in the contraventions committed by its subcontractor. This required the court to determine the requisite level of knowledge for establishing accessorial liability under the *Fair Work Act*. Specifically, the court had to consider whether Ozkorea needed to have knowledge of the precise wages paid to the employees, or if knowledge of the essential facts giving rise to the contravention was sufficient.
Judge McNab found that Ozkorea was indeed knowingly concerned in the contraventions. The court reasoned that actual knowledge of the essential elements of the facts that constituted the contravention was sufficient to establish accessorial liability. It was not necessary for Ozkorea to have knowledge of the exact wages paid, provided it knew that the employees were not being paid their minimum entitlements under the Award. This knowledge was imputed to Ozkorea, leading to the establishment of accessorial liability.
The central legal issue before Judge McNab was whether Ozkorea, as a head contractor, was knowingly concerned in the contraventions committed by its subcontractor. This required the court to determine the requisite level of knowledge for establishing accessorial liability under the *Fair Work Act*. Specifically, the court had to consider whether Ozkorea needed to have knowledge of the precise wages paid to the employees, or if knowledge of the essential facts giving rise to the contravention was sufficient.
Judge McNab found that Ozkorea was indeed knowingly concerned in the contraventions. The court reasoned that actual knowledge of the essential elements of the facts that constituted the contravention was sufficient to establish accessorial liability. It was not necessary for Ozkorea to have knowledge of the exact wages paid, provided it knew that the employees were not being paid their minimum entitlements under the Award. This knowledge was imputed to Ozkorea, leading to the establishment of accessorial liability.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Employment Law
-
Statutory Interpretation
Legal Concepts
-
Breach
-
Statutory Construction
-
Penalty
-
Vicarious Liability
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Most Recent Citation
Kroeger v Mornington Peninsula Shire Council [2019] FCCA 2313
Cases Citing This Decision
2
Tyson v Heiko Constructions Trading as Heiko Constructions Pty Ltd
[2019] FCCA 3643
Kroeger v Mornington Peninsula Shire Council
[2019] FCCA 2313
Cases Cited
18
Statutory Material Cited
6
Fair Work Ombudsman v South Jin Pty Ltd
[2015] FCA 1456
Qantas Airways Ltd v Transport Workers' Union of Australia
[2011] FCA 470
Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union v Clarke
[2007] FCAFC 87