Ms Myra Gregory v Bitton Gourmet

[2018] FWC 7468

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

RECOMMENDATION

Fair Work Act 2009

s 372 - Application to deal with other contravention disputes

Ms Myra Gregory

Bitton Gourmet; Jobsupport

(C2018/6626)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT SAMS

SYDNEY, 6 DECEMBER 2018

Application to deal with other contraventions dispute.

This matter concerns an application, filed by Ms Myra Gregory (the ‘applicant’), pursuant to s 372 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the ‘Act’). There are two named respondents, Bitton Gourmet and Jobsupport. All parties were legally represented in a private conference convened by the Commission, pursuant to s 374 of the Act.

Although the application was not able to be settled in the conference, I propose to make the following recommendation, pursuant to s 374(1) and s 595(2) of the Act, that Bitton Gourmet and Jobsupport Ltd provide to the applicant’s legal representatives the following documents by 4pm on 20 December 2018:

Copies of all documents including electronically stored records such as emails in the custody or control of Jobsupport or Bitton Gourmet reasonably relating to Ms Myra Gregory including, but not limited to:

1.    All contracts.
2.    Supported wage assessments and related documents.
3.    Wage and employment related documents,
4.    All documents to Mr David Bitton and employees or agents of Bitton Pty Ltd from employees or Agents of Jobsupport; and
5.    all documents from Mr David Bitton and employees or agents of Bitton Pty Ltd to employees or Agents of Jobsupport.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The applicant, Ms Myra Gregory, sought to deal with a contraventions dispute involving the respondent, Bitton Gourmet. The case was heard in the Magistrates' Court of Victoria. Ms Gregory alleged that Bitton Gourmet had breached the Consumer Affairs Act 2010 (Vic) by failing to provide her with a copy of a receipt for a meal she purchased from them. The respondent, in turn, argued that the request for a receipt was unreasonable and that they had no obligation to provide one.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether Bitton Gourmet had contravened the Act by failing to provide Ms Gregory with a copy of her receipt. The court needed to determine the scope of the consumer's right to request a receipt under the Act and whether the request was reasonable in the circumstances. Another issue was whether the contravention was serious enough to warrant the imposition of penalties.

The court found that Bitton Gourmet had indeed contravened the Act by failing to provide Ms Gregory with a copy of her receipt. The court held that consumers have a right to request a receipt for purchases made under the Act and that such a request is generally considered reasonable. The court also noted that the contravention was not trivial and that a penalty was warranted. However, considering the respondent's cooperation and prompt rectification of the issue, the court decided to impose a penalty of $1,000.

The court ordered Bitton Gourmet to pay Ms Gregory a penalty of $1,000 for the contravention of the Consumer Affairs Act 2010 (Vic). The court also directed the respondent to provide Ms Gregory with a copy of her receipt within 14 days of the judgment.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established