Taylor v August and Pemberton Pty Ltd [2023] FCA 1313

Federal Court of Australia

Taylor v August and Pemberton Pty Ltd [2023] FCA 1313 File number: NSD 643 of 2021

Judgment of: KATZMANN J

Date of judgment: 31 October 2023

Catchwords: HUMAN RIGHTS – discrimination – sexual harassment – where the applicant alleged that her employer had repeatedly engaged in sexual harassment by the conduct of its principal and sole director, by giving her numerous gifts, slapping her on the buttock, making various comments to her about her appearance orally and in text messages, declaring his affection for her and raising the matter again after she had told him she was not interested – whether all the alleged gifts were gifts or were unsolicited — whether any of the gifts were unwelcome – whether the applicant was slapped on the buttocks – whether comments and declarations of affection were made and whether they were unsolicited – whether any of the conduct amounted to "an unwelcome sexual advance or "other unwelcome conduct of a sexual nature" within the meaning of s 28A of the Sex Discrimination Act 1984 (Cth) – whether, if so, the conduct occurred in circumstances in which a reasonable person, having regard to all the circumstances, would have anticipated the possibility that the applicant would be offended, humiliated or intimidated HUMAN RIGHTS – victimisation – where in correspondence from her lawyers the applicant informed the respondents she was proposing to make a complaint about the alleged conduct to the Australian Human Rights Commission and did in fact do so, whether, by demanding the return of certain property, threatening to report the applicant to the police if she did not do so and/or making allegations of misconduct against her, the principal of the company, through his lawyers, committed acts of victimisation contrary to s 94 of the Sex Discrimination Act DAMAGES – where applicant exhibited symptoms of anxiety and depression after the conduct complained of and there was no dispute she had a psychiatric disorder which had not previously been diagnosed, whether respondents' conduct caused the disorder – what damages should be awarded – whether applicant entitled to aggravated damages