FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA
(DIVISION 2)
Kim v Naum BBQ Pty Ltd (No 2) [2025] FedCFamC2G 1627
File number: MLG 289 of 2023 Judgment of: JUDGE SYMONS Date of judgment: 7 October 2025 Catchwords: INDUSTRIAL LAW – Practice and Procedure – applicants seeking declarations of contravention of civil remedy provisions of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) – application for default judgment against respondents in circumstances where they failed to comply with Court orders and to appear at hearing – default judgment entered in respect of applicants’ claim – respondents’ defence struck out and cross-claim dismissed – declarations of contravention – compensation awarded for underpayments and loss of entitlements – issue of penalty to be determined on the papers Legislation: Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth), ss 44, 45, 90, 117, 323, 535, 536, 545, 570
Fair Work Regulations 2009 (Cth), regs 3.33, 3.34, 3.36, 3.37, 3.40, 3.42
Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Division 2)(General Federal Law) Rules 2025 (Cth), rr 5.07, 5.09, 5.11
Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth), r 5.23
Cases cited: Kidd v Kwek (No 2) [2024] FCA 194 Division: Division 2 General Federal Law Number of paragraphs: 58 Date of last submissions: 6 October 2025 Date of hearing: 6 October 2025 Place: Melbourne Counsel for the applicants: Mr A Jenshel Solicitor for the applicants: Mann Lawyers Solicitor for the respondents: There was no appearance by or on behalf of the first or second respondent ORDERS
MLG 289 of 2023 FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA (DIVISION 2)
BETWEEN: JUNGHUN KIM
First Applicant
JIHYUN KYE
Second Applicant
AND: NAUM BBQ PTY LTD (ACN 628 027 850)
First Respondent
BYOUNGWA LEE
Second Respondent
ORDER MADE BY:
JUDGE SYMONS
DATE OF ORDER:
7 OCTOBER 2025
THE COURT DECLARES THAT:
1.Upon admissions deemed to have been made by reason of the first and second respondents’ default pursuant to r 5.09 of the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Division 2) (General Federal Law) Rules 2025 (Cth) there be judgment for the applicants against the respondents.
2.During the period from 1 April 2019 to 6 November 2022, the first respondent contravened the following civil remedy provisions of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) (FW Act) in relation to the first applicant:
(a)contrary to s 535(1) of the FW Act, failed to make or keep records as prescribed by the Fair Work Regulations 2009 (Cth) (Regulations):
(i)Reg 3.34;
(ii)Reg 3.36(1);
(iii)Reg 3.37(1);
(iv)Reg 3.40(a); and
(v)Reg 3.33;
(b)contrary to s 535(3) of the FW Act and reg. 3.42 of the Regulations, failed to provide a copy of the records on request by the first applicant on 13 December 2022;
(c)contrary to s 536(1) of the FW Act, failed to provide payslips to the first applicant;
(d)contrary to ss 117 and 44 of the FW Act and clause 35.1 of the Restaurant Industry Award (MA000119) (Award), terminated the first applicant’s employment without notice and without payment in lieu of notice;
(e)contrary to…
Keep reading for free
Create a free CaseChat account to read Kim v Naum BBQ Pty Ltd (No 2) and more:
- Read every judgment in full
- Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
- See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
- Download judgments as PDF or Word
One click creates your free account or signs you in.
By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.
- Case
- [2025] FedCFamC2G 1627
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The Court found that the respondents had contravened the civil remedy provisions of the Fair Work Act by terminating the applicants without notice and underpaying them. The Court also found that the respondents had failed to comply with Court orders and did not appear at the hearing, thereby warranting a default judgment. The Court struck out the respondents’ defence and dismissed their cross-claim. The Court awarded the applicants compensation for underpayments and loss of entitlements. The penalty issue was to be determined on the papers.
The Court entered a default judgment in respect of the applicants’ claim. The respondents’ defence was struck out and their cross-claim was dismissed. The Court made declarations of contravention of the civil remedy provisions of the Fair Work Act. The applicants were awarded compensation for underpayments and loss of entitlements. The penalty issue was to be determined on the papers.
Orders
Orders of the court
Full text does not contain this section.
Background
Background to the litigation
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.