Fair Work Ombudsman v Robit Nominees Pty Ltd

The Fair Work Ombudsman (FWO) brought proceedings against Robit Nominees Pty Ltd and Mr Vertes. The dispute concerned alleged contraventions of the *Fair Work Act 2009* (Cth) (FW Act). The matter came before Judge Manousaridis for the assessment of penalties.

The court was required to determine whether the penalties submitted by the parties, namely $87,345 for Robit Nominees and $9,720 for Mr Vertes, were appropriate. While parties can propose penalty amounts, the court retains discretion and is not bound by such submissions. The court must satisfy itself that the proposed penalties are appropriate in all the circumstances.

The court applied a four-step procedure to assess the appropriateness of the submitted penalties. This involved identifying the number of contraventions, considering whether contraventions could be grouped under s 557 of the FW Act, assessing relevant penalty factors for each contravention, and finally, applying the totality principle to the aggregate penalty. The court was satisfied that this procedure was appropriate for determining whether the agreed penalties were suitable. The parties had agreed that the contraventions of Robit Nominees and Mr Vertes could be grouped into specific categories.