v v Y - [2000] NSWADT 121

CITATION: V -v- Y & anor [2000] NSWADT 121

DIVISION: Equal Opportunity Division

PARTIES:
APPLICANT
V
FIRST RESPONDENT
Y
SECOND RESPONDENT
Z

FILE NUMBER: 19 of 1998

HEARING DATES: 23, 24 & 25/02/2000; 17 & 18/04/2000; 17 & 18/05/2000

SUBMISSIONS CLOSED: 06/05/2000

DATE OF DECISION:
09/01/2000

BEFORE: Ireland G - Judicial Member; Clayton S - Member; Cox R - Member

APPLICATION: Sexual Harassment - In workplace

MATTER FOR DECISION: Principal matter

LEGISLATION CITED: Anti-Discrimination Act 1977

CASES CITED: M v. R Pty Ltd (1998)EOC1992
H L Bolton (Engineering) Co Ltd v. T J Graham & Sons Ltd (1974) 1 QB 159
Universal Telecasters (Qld) Ltd v. Guthrie (1977)18 ALR 531
Hill v. Water Resources Commission (1985) EOC
Farres v. Box Hill College of TAFE and Ors (1992)EOC
Purkess v. Crittenden (1965) 114 CLR
Watts v. Rake 108 CLR
Shellharbour Golf Club v. Wheeler (1999)NSW SC224

REPRESENTATION:
APPLICANT
A Healey, barrister
FIRST RESPONDENT
R St John QC with K Roser, barristers
SECOND RESPONDENT
No appearance

ORDERS: (1) The Second Respondent, within seven days of receiving written advice from Mrs V’s solicitors of this direction, to send to Mrs V a letter of apology for his acts of sexual harassment towards her while she was employed at the Motel. The Second Respondent shall send that apology by certified prepaid post addressed to Mrs V care of the address of her solicitor; (2) The First Respondent and the Second Respondent to pay to Mrs V an amount of $16,987.00; (3) The liability of the First and Second Respondents to pay the amount of $16,987.00 is joint and several. The Applicant is entitled to recover the full amount awarded from either respondent. The Tribunal will assess the respective contributions to be made between the respondents after application by either respondent to the Registrar to fix a date for hearing the application.; (4) It is noted that the amount of $16,987.00 comprises the following awards: (i) $12,000.00 for general damages; (ii) $1,837.00 for loss of earnings; and (iii) $3,150.00 for medical treatment; (5) Mrs V to apply the amount awarded for medical treatment towards treatment from a psychologist or psychiatrist of her choice; (6) If the parties to this enquiry are unable to agree upon an award and assessment of the costs of this enquiry and the hearing on 24 September 1999 within a period of 21 days of the date of this decision, any one of the parties is at liberty to apply to the Registrar to fix a date for hearing an application by the Tribunal to determine the question of those costs.

History of complaints

1 Mrs V lodged a complaint with the Anti-Discrimination Board on 9 September 1996 in which she alleged she had been discriminated against on the ground of her sex at “the Motel by Mr Z, an employee of the First Respondent. Mrs V had made a statement to the Police at C about Mr Z’s conduct on 29 August 1996 and on that day an Interim Apprehended…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading v v Y

Details

AGLC: v v Y [2000] NSWADT 121
Case: [2000] NSWADT 121
Decision Date: 09/01/2000

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the Federal Court of Australia, the case of v v Y involved a dispute concerning allegations of sexual harassment against the Second Respondent, who was employed by the First Respondent at the Motel where the Applicant, Mrs V, also worked. Mrs V brought the case forward, seeking compensation for the harassment she experienced during her employment. The court had to address various legal issues, including whether the allegations of sexual harassment were substantiated and, if so, what compensation should be awarded to Mrs V for the harm she suffered. The court also needed to determine the extent of the First Respondent's liability, given their role as the employer.

The court examined the evidence presented by both parties and considered the nature and impact of the alleged harassment on Mrs V. It was established that the Second Respondent had indeed engaged in acts of sexual harassment towards Mrs V. The court meticulously evaluated the impact of these actions on Mrs V’s mental health, work performance, and overall well-being. The evidence provided by Mrs V was deemed credible, and the court found that the Second Respondent's conduct constituted a serious breach of workplace conduct standards. The court found the First Respondent vicariously liable for the actions of the Second Respondent due to their role as the employer. Consequently, the court awarded Mrs V compensation for general damages, loss of earnings, and medical treatment costs, totaling $16,987.00. The court also mandated that the Second Respondent provide a formal apology to Mrs V.

The court's decision was clear and comprehensive. It held both respondents jointly and severally liable for the compensation award. The First Respondent was held responsible for the actions of the Second Respondent under principles of vicarious liability. Additionally, the court directed that the apology be sent within a specified timeframe and that Mrs V could apply the medical treatment award towards psychological or psychiatric treatment of her choice. The court also provided a mechanism for determining the costs of the proceeding if the parties could not agree on the amount.

Orders

Orders of the court

(1) The Second Respondent, within seven days of receiving written advice from Mrs V’s solicitors of this direction, to send to Mrs V a letter of apology for his acts of sexual harassment towards her while she was employed at the Motel. The Second Respondent shall send that apology by certified prepaid post addressed to Mrs V care of the address of her solicitor; (2) The First Respondent and the Second Respondent to pay to Mrs V an amount of $16,987.00; (3) The liability of the First and Second Respondents to pay the amount of $16,987.00 is joint and several. The Applicant is entitled to recover the full amount awarded from either respondent. The Tribunal will assess the respective contributions to be made between the respondents after application by either respondent to the Registrar to fix a date for hearing the application.; (4) It is noted that the amount of $16,987.00 comprises the following awards: (i) $12,000.00 for general damages; (ii) $1,837.00 for loss of earnings; and (iii) $3,150.00 for medical treatment; (5) Mrs V to apply the amount awarded for medical treatment towards treatment from a psychologist or psychiatrist of her choice; (6) If the parties to this enquiry are unable to agree upon an award and assessment of the costs of this enquiry and the hearing on 24 September 1999 within a period of 21 days of the date of this decision, any one of the parties is at liberty to apply to the Registrar to fix a date for hearing an application by the Tribunal to determine the question of those 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.

CITATION:	V -v- Y & anor [2000] NSWADT 121
DIVISION:	Equal Opportunity Division
PARTIES:	APPLICANT V FIRST RESPONDENT Y SECOND RESPONDENT Z
FILE NUMBER:	19 of 1998
HEARING DATES:	23, 24 & 25/02/2000; 17 & 18/04/2000; 17 & 18/05/2000
SUBMISSIONS CLOSED:	06/05/2000
DATE OF DECISION:	09/01/2000
BEFORE:	Ireland G - Judicial Member; Clayton S - Member; Cox R - Member
APPLICATION:	Sexual Harassment - In workplace
MATTER FOR DECISION:	Principal matter
LEGISLATION CITED:	Anti-Discrimination Act 1977
CASES CITED:	M v. R Pty Ltd (1998)EOC1992 H L Bolton (Engineering) Co Ltd v. T J Graham & Sons Ltd (1974) 1 QB 159 Universal Telecasters (Qld) Ltd v. Guthrie (1977)18 ALR 531 Hill v. Water Resources Commission (1985) EOC Farres v. Box Hill College of TAFE and Ors (1992)EOC Purkess v. Crittenden (1965) 114 CLR Watts v. Rake 108 CLR Shellharbour Golf Club v. Wheeler (1999)NSW SC224
REPRESENTATION:	APPLICANT A Healey, barrister FIRST RESPONDENT R St John QC with K Roser, barristers SECOND RESPONDENT No appearance
ORDERS:	(1) The Second Respondent, within seven days of receiving written advice from Mrs V’s solicitors of this direction, to send to Mrs V a letter of apology for his acts of sexual harassment towards her while she was employed at the Motel. The Second Respondent shall send that apology by certified prepaid post addressed to Mrs V care of the address of her solicitor; (2) The First Respondent and the Second Respondent to pay to Mrs V an amount of $16,987.00; (3) The liability of the First and Second Respondents to pay the amount of $16,987.00 is joint and several. The Applicant is entitled to recover the full amount awarded from either respondent. The Tribunal will assess the respective contributions to be made between the respondents after application by either respondent to the Registrar to fix a date for hearing the application.; (4) It is noted that the amount of $16,987.00 comprises the following awards: (i) $12,000.00 for general damages; (ii) $1,837.00 for loss of earnings; and (iii) $3,150.00 for medical treatment; (5) Mrs V to apply the amount awarded for medical treatment towards treatment from a psychologist or psychiatrist of her choice; (6) If the parties to this enquiry are unable to agree upon an award and assessment of the costs of this enquiry and the hearing on 24 September 1999 within a period of 21 days of the date of this decision, any one of the parties is at liberty to apply to the Registrar to fix a date for hearing an application by the Tribunal to determine the question of those costs.