Romero v Farstad Shipping (Indian Pacific) Pty Ltd (No 3) [2017] FCAFC 102

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Romero v Farstad Shipping (Indian Pacific) Pty Ltd (No 3) [2017] FCAFC 102 Appeal from: Romero v Farstad Shipping (Indian Pacific) Pty Ltd (No 3) [2016] FCA 1453 Romero v Farstad Shipping (Indian Pacific) Pty Ltd (No 4) [2017] FCA 120

File number: TAD 2 of 2017

Judges: ALLSOP CJ, RARES AND MCKERRACHER JJ

Date of judgment: 4 July 2017

Catchwords: CONTRACT – employment contract breached by failing to comply with Workplace Harassment and Discrimination Policy (Policy) – nature of the term – whether the Policy was incorporated into the employment contract as an essential term – test of essentiality – whether conduct evinced an intention to only fulfil the contract in a manner substantially inconsistent with contractual obligations amounting to repudiation – whether there was a sufficiently serious breach of a non-essential term to justify termination – affirmation and election – whether conduct consistent with acceptance of repudiation or renunciation DAMAGES – foreseeability of the consequences of breach – remoteness – whether damages were the natural and probable consequence of the breaches or within the reasonable contemplation of the parties when they entered into the contract COSTS – whether nominal damages warrant an award of costs where claim pursued for substantial damages – where part of claim settled by way of a deed in which sum of money was received – where remaining claims not established after execution of settlement deed – partial costs awarded up to the date of executing settlement deed

Legislation: Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) s 43 Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) r 25.14(1)