Von Schoeler v Allen Taylor and Company Ltd Trading as Boral Timber (No 2)

The appeal in Von Schoeler v Allen Taylor and Company Ltd Trading as Boral Timber (No 2) was heard in the Federal Court of Australia. The primary dispute involved Ms Von Schoeler's allegations of sexual harassment by Mr Urquhart and subsequent discrimination and victimisation by various employees of Boral. Ms Von Schoeler sought to establish that Boral was vicariously liable for the actions of its employees under the Sex Discrimination Act 1984 (Cth). The central legal issues addressed in this case revolved around whether Boral took all reasonable steps to prevent sexual harassment, the adequacy of the employer's response to the complaint, and the timeliness and sufficiency of the primary judge's reasons for judgment.

The Court considered the argument that Boral failed to take all reasonable steps to prevent sexual harassment, as required by s 106(2) of the SDA. The primary judge had concluded that Boral had taken all reasonable steps based on the existence of a "Working With Respect" policy and recent training for employees. Ms Von Schoeler argued that this conclusion was flawed, particularly given the delay in investigating her complaint and the inadequate system for handling such complaints. The Court found merit in the argument that merely having a policy and conducting training was insufficient to satisfy the requirement of taking all reasonable steps, especially in light of the employer's delayed response to the complaint. The Court also noted that the primary judge's reasons were not comprehensive and did not adequately address all the evidence and submissions.

The Court allowed the appeal, set aside the orders of the primary judge, and declared that Boral was vicariously liable for the sexual harassment by Mr Urquhart. The Court found that the primary judge's reasons were inadequate and that the matter should be remitted to the Federal Circuit Court for reconsideration by a different judge. The Court further ordered that Boral pay Ms Von Schoeler's costs of the appeal.