Shergill v Singh (No 2)

In Shergill v Singh (No 2), the Federal Court was tasked with determining the appropriate pecuniary penalty to be imposed on Mr Navdeep Suri Singh, the former Indian High Commissioner to Australia, for serious contraventions of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth). The legal issues before the court included the determination of the appropriate penalty under section 546 of the Fair Work Act and the consideration of relevant non-exhaustive factors, such as the nature and extent of the contraventions, the degree of deliberateness, and the circumstances in which the conduct took place. Mr Singh did not participate in any of the court's processes, and the court found that his conduct was deliberate, stemming from his deliberate avoidance of his obligations under Australian law to pay Ms Shergill her entitlements.

The court held that the primary purpose of the civil penalty was deterrence. It considered the maximum penalties specified in the Fair Work Act, which were 600 penalty units for serious contraventions. The court found that the appropriate penalty, considering the totality of Mr Singh's conduct, was $97,200. This penalty was deemed necessary to deter Mr Singh and others from engaging in similar conduct in the future. The court applied the totality principle to ensure that the penalty was proportionate to the conduct viewed as a whole. The court also noted that the penalty was appropriate given the egregious nature of Mr Singh's conduct and the significant breaches of Australian law involved.

In conclusion, the court ordered Mr Navdeep Suri Singh to pay a pecuniary penalty of $97,200 to Ms Shergill within 60 days. This decision reflects the court's commitment to ensuring that appropriate penalties are imposed to deter unlawful conduct and to protect vulnerable workers.