Fair Work Ombudsman v Sempha Solutions Pty Ltd - [2025] FedCFamC2G 1155

FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA
(DIVISION 2)
Fair Work Ombudsman v Sempha Solutions Pty Ltd [2025] FedCFamC2G 1155

File number(s): MLG 2274 of 2024

Judgment of: JUDGE MANSINI

Date of judgment: 22 July 2025

Catchwords: INDUSTRIAL LAW – FAIR WORK – retail industry – failure to comply with compliance notice – where default judgment was entered in respect of liability and respondent has continued to elect not to participate in the proceedings for relief – final relief granted on default.

Legislation:
Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) ss. 545, 550, 716

Fair Work Legislation Amendment (Closing Loopholes No. 2) Act 2024 (Cth)

Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Division 2) (General Federal Law) Rules 2021 (Cth) r.13.06

General Retail Industry Award 2020

Cases cited:
Australian Building and Construction Commissioner v Pattinson (2022) 274 CLR 450

CFMMEU v ABCC [2018] FCAFC 97

Commonwealth v Director, Fair Work Building Industry Inspectorate (2015) 258 CLR 482

Trade Practices Commission v CSR Ltd (1991) ATPR 41-076

Division: Division 2 General Federal Law

Number of paragraphs: 31

Date of hearing: 8 July 2025

Place: Melbourne

Solicitor for the Applicant: Australian Government Solicitor

The First Respondent: There being no appearance

The Second Respondent: There being no appearance
ORDERS

MLG 2274 of 2024

FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA (DIVISION 2)

BETWEEN:
FAIR WORK OMBUDSMAN

Applicant

AND:
SEMPHA SOLUTIONS PTY LTD (ACN 609 049 443)

First Respondent

SIMON PAUL HERMAN

Second Respondent

ORDER MADE BY:

JUDGE MANSINI

DATE OF ORDER:

22 JULY 2025

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1.By no later than 4.00pm on 19 August 2025 and pursuant to s.545(1) of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) (Act), the First Respondent take the steps that were required by the statutory compliance notice dated 5 October 2023 (Notice) as specified at paragraphs 8 to 11 of the Notice.
2.By no later than 4.00pm on 19 August 2025 and pursuant to s.546(1) of the Act, the First Respondent pay a pecuniary penalty to the Commonwealth of Australia in the amount of $18,780 in respect of the contraventions of the Act subject of declarations, made on 26 November 2024.
3.By no later than 4.00pm on 19 August 2025 and pursuant to s.546(1) of the Act, the Second Respondent pay a pecuniary penalty to the Commonwealth of Australia in the amount of $3,756 in respect of the contraventions of the Act subject of declarations, made on 26 November 2024.
4.By 4.00pm on 23 July 2025, the Applicant is to serve a copy of these orders on the First Respondent and the Second Respondent along with a copy of the Court’s reasons of 22 July 2025.
5.The Applicant have liberty to apply on 7 days’ notice in the event of non-compliance with these orders.

Note: The form of the order is subject to the entry in the Court’s records.
Note: The Court may vary or set aside a judgment or order to remedy minor typographical or grammatical errors (r 17.05(2)(g) Federal…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading Fair Work Ombudsman v Sempha Solutions Pty Ltd

Details

AGLC: Fair Work Ombudsman v Sempha Solutions Pty Ltd [2025] FedCFamC2G 1155
Case: [2025] FedCFamC2G 1155
Decision Date: 22 July 2025

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the Federal Circuit Court, Fair Work Ombudsman v Sempha Solutions Pty Ltd involved a dispute regarding compliance with a compliance notice in the retail industry. The Fair Work Ombudsman, acting on behalf of the Commonwealth of Australia, sought enforcement of a compliance notice against Sempha Solutions Pty Ltd, alleging non-compliance with certain industrial laws. The respondent, Sempha Solutions Pty Ltd, had previously been issued with a compliance notice and subsequently faced default judgment for liability. Despite this, the respondent continued to abstain from participating in the proceedings for relief.

The court was tasked with determining the appropriate relief to be granted in light of the respondent's persistent non-participation and failure to comply with the initial compliance notice. The primary legal issues revolved around the enforcement of the compliance notice and the consequences of the respondent's ongoing non-compliance. The court had to consider whether to grant the final relief sought by the Fair Work Ombudsman and, if so, what form that relief should take.

The court ruled in favour of the Fair Work Ombudsman, granting the final relief as sought. It found that Sempha Solutions Pty Ltd's continued non-compliance with the compliance notice justified the imposition of the penalties and compliance orders. The court also noted that the respondent had not contested the matter or provided any justification for its non-compliance, which further supported the granting of the relief. As such, the court ordered that the penalty be paid to the Commonwealth within 28 days and granted the Fair Work Ombudsman the right to apply for enforcement if the orders were not complied with.

Orders

Orders of the court

Full text does not contain this section.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

I will also order that the penalty be payable to the Commonwealth of Australia within 28 days of these orders as sought and the FWO have liberty to apply on 7 days’ notice in the event of non-compliance with the Court’s orders.CONCLUSION For the above reasons, I will make orders accordingly.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.

File number(s):	MLG 2274 of 2024
Judgment of:	JUDGE MANSINI
Date of judgment:	22 July 2025
Catchwords:	INDUSTRIAL LAW – FAIR WORK – retail industry – failure to comply with compliance notice – where default judgment was entered in respect of liability and respondent has continued to elect not to participate in the proceedings for relief – final relief granted on default.
Legislation:	Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) ss. 545, 550, 716 Fair Work Legislation Amendment (Closing Loopholes No. 2) Act 2024 (Cth) Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Division 2) (General Federal Law) Rules 2021 (Cth) r.13.06 General Retail Industry Award 2020
Cases cited:	Australian Building and Construction Commissioner v Pattinson (2022) 274 CLR 450 CFMMEU v ABCC [2018] FCAFC 97 Commonwealth v Director, Fair Work Building Industry Inspectorate (2015) 258 CLR 482 Trade Practices Commission v CSR Ltd (1991) ATPR 41-076
Division:	Division 2 General Federal Law
Number of paragraphs:	31
Date of hearing:	8 July 2025
Place:	Melbourne
Solicitor for the Applicant:	Australian Government Solicitor
The First Respondent:	There being no appearance
The Second Respondent:	There being no appearance

MLG 2274 of 2024
FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA (DIVISION 2)
BETWEEN:	FAIR WORK OMBUDSMAN Applicant
AND:	SEMPHA SOLUTIONS PTY LTD (ACN 609 049 443) First Respondent SIMON PAUL HERMAN Second Respondent

ORDER MADE BY:	JUDGE MANSINI
DATE OF ORDER:	22 JULY 2025