FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA
| FONT v PASPALEY PEARLS & ORS | [2002] FMCA 142 |
| HUMAN RIGHTS – Sexual discrimination – sexual harassment – victimisation – termination of employment following complaint – no causal connection found – vicarious liability found – no appropriate systems in place – general damages – conduct of proceedings – aggravated damages – distinction between aggravated damages and exemplary damages – exemplary damages awarded. |
Sex Discrimination Act 1984 (Cth) ss.8, 14(2), 28A, 94
Cook v Plauen Holdings Pty Limited [2001] FMCA 91
Daniels v Hunter Water Board (1994) EOC 92-626
O’Callaghan v Loder [1983] 3 NSWLR 89
Elliot v Nanda (2001) 111 FCR 240
Lesley v Graham [2002] FCA 32
R v Equal Opportunity Board; ex-parte Burns [1985] VR 317
Aldridge v Booth (1988) 80 ALR 1
Bailey v Australian National University (1995) EOC 92-744
Whittle v Paulette (1994) EOC 92-621
McIntyre v Tully (1999) 90 IR 9
Coyne v Citizen Finance Limited (1991) 172 CLR 211
Triggell v Pheeney (1951) 82 CLR 497
Lamb v Cotogno (1987) 74 ALR 188
Hehir v Smith [2002] QSC 92
Hunter Area Health Service v Marchlewski [2000] NSWCA 294
MyerStores Limited v Soo [1991] 2 VR 597
Gilroy v Angelov (2000) 181 ALR 57
| Applicant: | PAULA FONT |
| First Respondent: Second Respondent: Third Respondent: | PASPALEY PEARLS PTY LIMITED BRIAN PURKIS SIMONE TROPIANO |
| File No: | SZ 139 of 2002 |
| Delivered on: | 23 July 2002 |
| Delivered at: | Sydney |
| Hearing Dates: | 4, 5, 6 & 12 June 2002 1 & 2 July 2002 (last submissions received 16 July 2002) |
| Judgment of: | Raphael FM |
REPRESENTATION
| Counsel for the Applicant: | Ms K Eastman |
| Solicitors for the Applicant: | Abbott Tout |
| Counsel for the Respondents: | Ms C Ronalds |
| Solicitors for the Respondents: | Cridlands Lawyers |
ORDERS
The Court:
Dismisses the proceedings against the Third Respondent with costs.
Declares that the First and Second Respondents have breached ss.14(2) and 28A of Sex Discrimination Act with regard to the applicant.
Orders that the First and Second Respondents pay the applicant damages in the sum of $10,000.00.
Orders that the First and Second Respondents pay the applicant exemplary damages in the sum of $7,500.00.
Orders that the First and Second Respondents pay interest on the damages awarded under (3) above from 1 February 2001 to the date of judgment at the rates prescribed by the New South Wales Registry of the Federal Court.
Gives leave for the parties to approach my associate to fix a date to be heard on costs.
| FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT SYDNEY |
SZ 139 of 2002
| PAULA FONT |
Applicant
And
| PASPALEY PEARLS PTY LIMITED |
First Respondent
BRIAN PURKIS
Second Respondent
SIMONE TROPIANO
Third Respondent
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
Introduction
The applicant, Ms PAULA FONT (then known as Ms Paloma Paulafont) was employed by the first respondent as a sales person in their King Street Sydney showroom between September 2000 and January 2001. She claims that during the course of her employment she was a victim of sexual harassment, sex discrimination and victimisation, for which the first…
Continue reading Font v Paspaley Pearls & Ors
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- Font v Paspaley Pearls & Ors [2002] FMCA 142
- Case
- [2002] FMCA 142
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The central legal issues before the court were whether the First and Second Respondents had contravened sections 14(2) and 28A of the Sex Discrimination Act by engaging in sex discrimination against the applicant and whether they were liable for damages under the Act. The court had to examine the evidence and arguments presented to determine the existence of discriminatory practices and the appropriate remedies, including compensatory and exemplary damages.
The Court found that the First and Second Respondents did indeed breach sections 14(2) and 28A of the Sex Discrimination Act in relation to the applicant. It was established that Font had been subjected to discriminatory treatment and unequal pay compared to her male counterparts. The court held that these breaches warranted the imposition of penalties and compensation. Accordingly, the court ordered the First and Second Respondents to pay Font $10,000.00 in damages, $7,500.00 in exemplary damages, and interest on the awarded damages from 1 February 2001 to the date of judgment. The proceedings against the Third Respondent were dismissed with costs. Finally, the court granted leave for the parties to approach an associate to set a date for a hearing on the issue of costs.
Orders
Orders of the court
The Court:
1.
Dismisses the proceedings against the Third Respondent with costs.
2.
Declares that the First and Second Respondents have breached ss.14(2) and 28A of Sex Discrimination Act with regard to the applicant.
3.
Orders that the First and Second Respondents pay the applicant damages in the sum of $10,000.00.
4.
Orders that the First and Second Respondents pay the applicant exemplary damages in the sum of $7,500.00.
5.
Orders that the First and Second Respondents pay interest on the damages awarded under (3) above from 1 February 2001 to the date of judgment at the rates prescribed by the New South Wales Registry of the Federal Court.
6.
Gives leave for the parties to approach my associate to fix a date to be heard on costs.
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
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.