Federal Court of Australia
Federal Court of Australia
Fair Work Ombudsman v Lam [2021] FCA 205 File number: NSD 1001 of 2019
Judgment of: PERRAM J
Date of judgment: 11 March 2021
Catchwords: INDUSTRIAL LAW – application for declarations and pecuniary penalties for breaches of Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) and Miscellaneous Award 2010 (Cth) – where Respondents employed domestic worker and nanny – quantum of penalties
Legislation: Evidence Act 1995 (Cth) s 144 Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) Pt 2-3, ss 44, 45, 48, 62, 90, 535, 536, 545, 550, 557 Miscellaneous Award 2010 (Cth) cll 4.1, 4.2, 14.1, 22.1, 22.3
Cases cited: 4 yearly review of modern awards – Miscellaneous Award 2010 [2020] FWCFB 754; 292 IR 373 Australian Securities and Investments Commission v Australian Property Custodian Holdings Limited (Receivers and Managers appointed) (in liquidation) (Controllers appointed) [2014] FCA 1308; 322 ALR 45
Division: Fair Work Division
Registry: New South Wales
National Practice Area: Employment and Industrial Relations
Number of paragraphs: 28
Date of hearing: 1 September 2020
Counsel for the Applicant: Ms G Walker
Solicitor for the Applicant: Office of the Fair Work Ombudsman
Counsel for the Respondents: Mr D Chin SC with Mr T Liu
Solicitor for the Respondents: Bartier Perry Lawyers
ORDERS NSD 1001 of 2019
BETWEEN: FAIR WORK OMBUDSMAN Applicant
AND: KIT ANTHONY LAM First Respondent
MING WEI TONG Second Respondent
order made by: PERRAM J DATE OF ORDER: 11 March 2021
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate