Fair Work Ombudsman v Viper Industries Pty Ltd
Case
•
[2015] FCCA 492
•4 March 2015
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Fair Work Ombudsman v Viper Industries Pty Ltd [2015] FCCA 492
[2015] FCCA 492
4 March 2015
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The Fair Work Ombudsman commenced proceedings against Viper Industries Pty Ltd and Mr. Anthony John Smith, alleging that Viper Industries failed to comply with a notice issued under section 716 of the *Fair Work Act 2009* (Cth). The Ombudsman also alleged that Mr. Smith was knowingly concerned in Viper Industries' contravention of the Act, pursuant to section 550 of the Act. The proceedings sought declarations of contravention and the imposition of civil penalties.
The primary legal issues before the Court were whether Viper Industries had contravened section 716 of the Act by failing to comply with the compliance notice, and whether Mr. Smith had contravened section 550 of the Act by being knowingly concerned in Viper Industries' contravention. The Court was also required to determine the appropriate civil penalty to be imposed on each respondent for their respective contraventions.
Emmett J found that Viper Industries had failed to comply with the compliance notice issued by the Fair Work Ombudsman, thereby contravening section 716 of the Act. His Honour also found that Mr. Smith was knowingly concerned in Viper Industries' contravention, and therefore contravened section 550 of the Act. In determining the appropriate civil penalties, the Court considered the nature and circumstances of the contraventions, the size of the employer, and the need for deterrence. The Court ordered Viper Industries to pay a penalty of $10,200 and Mr. Smith to pay a penalty of $2,040.
The primary legal issues before the Court were whether Viper Industries had contravened section 716 of the Act by failing to comply with the compliance notice, and whether Mr. Smith had contravened section 550 of the Act by being knowingly concerned in Viper Industries' contravention. The Court was also required to determine the appropriate civil penalty to be imposed on each respondent for their respective contraventions.
Emmett J found that Viper Industries had failed to comply with the compliance notice issued by the Fair Work Ombudsman, thereby contravening section 716 of the Act. His Honour also found that Mr. Smith was knowingly concerned in Viper Industries' contravention, and therefore contravened section 550 of the Act. In determining the appropriate civil penalties, the Court considered the nature and circumstances of the contraventions, the size of the employer, and the need for deterrence. The Court ordered Viper Industries to pay a penalty of $10,200 and Mr. Smith to pay a penalty of $2,040.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Employment Law
-
Statutory Interpretation
Legal Concepts
-
Penalty
-
Vicarious Liability
-
Remedies
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Most Recent Citation
Fair Work Ombudsman v Azman [2022] FedCFamC2G 198
Cases Citing This Decision
37
Fair Work Ombudsman v Sails Waterfront Bar & Grill Pty Ltd (No 2)
[2021] FCCA 2002
Fair Work Ombudsman v Sphere 38 (BNE) Pty Ltd
[2021] FCCA 536
Fair Work Ombudsman v Althaus Homes Pty Ltd
[2021] FCCA 126
Cases Cited
5
Statutory Material Cited
0
Fair Work Ombudsman v Jaycee Trading Pty Ltd & Anor (No.2)
[2013] FCCA 2128
Fair Work Ombudsman v Daladontics (Vic) Pty Ltd
[2014] FCCA 2571