Resources: Blog

Court orders jail term for owner-operator who failed to comply with orders resulting from Fair Work action


Jailhouse Rock

In June 2015, Judge Jarrett of the Federal Circuit Court of Australia found that a Northern Queensland-based tour company and its owner had underpaid five employees and contravened the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth).

In June 2015, Judge Jarrett of the Federal Circuit Court of Australia found that a Northern Queensland-based tour company and its owner had underpaid five employees and contravened the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) (FW Act) (Fair Work Ombudsman v Trek North Tours & Anor (No.2) [2015] FCCA 1801).

Prior to commencing the Federal Circuit Court proceedings, the Fair Work Ombudsman (FWO) conducted an investigation into several complaints it received from employees and issued compliance notices to the company. The company failed to comply with those notices and a Fair Work Inspector reported that the owner said to her,

The compliance notices are rubbish. I have no intention of paying the money. I will have thousands of complaints against me before I do. The Fair Work Act reeks of fascism and I will never pay any of the money.

The company and the owner did not appear and were not represented in the Federal Circuit Court proceedings. As a result, a default judgement was entered against them. Understandably, Judge Jarrett described the company and the owner as “entirely uncooperative.”

The orders made by Judge Jarrett included:

  • The company was fined $55,000;
  • The owner-operator was fined $12,000;
  • The underpaid employees were to be paid their entitlements.

The penalties and back-pay were to be paid within 28 days of the Federal Circuit Court’s order.

In July 2015, Judge Jarrett made further orders freezing the assets of the company and the owner pending compliance with the earlier orders. The freezing orders were the result of an application by the FWO in which it outlined concerns that the owner might attempt to bankrupt the company to avoid paying the penalties or back-pay.

Following the freezing orders, the owner paid the penalty ordered against him personally but failed to pay the penalty against the company or back-pay the employees. The owner then moved money from two frozen company accounts into his family trust account.

This action triggered the FWO to commence contempt proceedings, claiming that the owner had failed to comply with the Federal Circuit Court’s orders.

On 10 May 2018, Judge Vasta of the Federal Court of Australia sentenced the owner to 12 months’ imprisonment for contempt of court for his failure to follow the Federal Circuit Court’s orders.

The owner appealed this outcome and a stay order was issued, granting the owner bail until a further hearing. The terms of the stay order included that the owner must:

  • surrender his passport;
  • not leave Queensland without permission;
  • report to Cairns Police Station each Wednesday and Saturday; and;
  • reside at a known address.

This is the first contempt of court case run by the FWO and has resulted in the imposition of a prison sentence against a business owner.

Clearly, this case demonstrates the seriousness with which employers should take approaches from the FWO, particularly if those approaches involve potential litigation.

The FWO has powers beyond simply issuing compliance notices and, as the FWO, Natalie James has said, it is prepared to use every tool at its disposal – “This includes taking unprecedented new actions available to us across the legal framework such as this one.”


Information provided in this blog is not legal advice and should not be relied upon as such. Workplace Law does not accept liability for any loss or damage arising from reliance on the content of this blog, or from links on this website to any external website. Where applicable, liability is limited by a scheme approved under Professional Standards Legislation.

Similar articles

Employee dismissed for failing BAC tests

Cigarettes and cough lollies

In a recent unfair dismissal decision, the Fair Work Commission (FWC) has supported an employer’s decision to dismiss an employee for breaching its drug and alcohol policy despite the employer failing to strictly enforce the policy.


Vaccinations and the workplace

Shots fired

One of the most topical questions for employers during the COVID-19 pandemic has been whether they need to introduce policies that mandate vaccinations and, if so, what can be done to enforce them in the workplace.


Fine following workplace fatality quadrupled following Government intervention

Work health and safety legislation in Australia places significant duties and obligations on persons conducting a business or undertaking (PCBU) to ensure the health and safety of workers.


Commission orders employer to pay compensation as a result of its procedurally unfair disciplinary process

Procedurally disastrous

When investigating allegations of misconduct against an employee in the workplace, employers must ensure that any ensuing disciplinary process is kept distinct from and separate to from the investigation.


The importance of WHS refresher training

Not a “one and done” thing

It is an expected and necessary part of work health and safety (WHS) plans that all new workers receive relevant WHS training.


Casual Terms Award Review 2021


In March 2021, the casual employment amendments to the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) (FW Act) introduced a new statutory definition of “casual employee” and an entitlement to casual conversion as one of the National Employment Standards (NES).


Let's talk

please contact our directors to discuss how ouR expertise can help your business.

We're here to help

Contact Us
Let Workplace Law become your partner in Workplace Relations.

Signup to receive the latest industry updates with commentary from the Workplace Law team direct to you inbox.