Fair Work Ombudsman v Angel [2026] FedCFamC2G 69

(a) section 716(5) of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) (FW Act) by failing to comply with the compliance notice with respect to Mr Dalton Law (Mr Law), given to the respondent by Fair Work Inspector Davies on 30 August 2023 pursuant to s 716 of the FW Act (Compliance Notice); and

(b) section 536(1) of the FW Act by failing to give Mr Law a pay slip within one working day of making payment to Mr Law in relation to the performance of work.

1. Pursuant to ss 545(1) and 545(2)(d) of the FW Act, within 28 days of this order the respondent take steps to comply with the Compliance Notice by:

(a) calculating and paying to the applicant the outstanding amounts he was required to pay to Mr Law under the Compliance Notice (Outstanding Amount);

(b) calculating and paying any additional superannuation contributions on the Outstanding Amount into Mr Law's nominated superannuation fund;

(c) preparing and producing to the applicant a schedule outlining his calculation of the amounts outlined in paragraphs 2(a) and 2(b) above; and

(d) providing the applicant with proof of payment of the amounts outlined in paragraphs 2(a) and 2(b) above.

1. Pursuant to s 547(2) of the FW Act, within 28 days of this order, the respondent pay interest to the applicant at the applicable pre-judgment interest rate, as prescribed by the Federal Court of Australia from time to time, on the Outstanding Amount.
2. The applicant distribute to Mr Law the amounts paid to the applicant in accordance with order 2(a) and order 3 within 28 days of the date payment is made to the applicant.

Note: The form of the order is subject to the entry in the Court's records.

Note: The Court may vary or set aside a judgment or order to remedy minor typographical or grammatical errors (r 24.04(g) Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Division 2) (General Federal Law) Rules 2025 (Cth)), or to record a variation to the order pursuant to r 24.04 Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Division 2) (General Federal Law) Rules 2025 (Cth).

1. By application lodged with the Court on 13 March 2025 accompanied by a Statement of Claim (Originating Application), the applicant sought relief in respect of a failure by the respondent to comply with a compliance noticed issued to him by a fair work inspector on 30 August 2023 (failure to comply with compliance notice). The compliance notice required the respondent, a sole trader trading as 'Coolah Smash Worx' (formerly trading as 'Angel Smash Worx') to calculate and rectify underpayments and any additional superannuation contributions to an employee.
2. The applicant also sought relief in respect of a failure by the respondent to give an employee a pay slip within one working day of making payment to the employee in relation to the performance of work (failure to give employee pay slip within statutory time limit).
3. For the purposes of this judgment, the respondent's alleged failure to comply with compliance notice and give employee pay slip within statutory time limit are collectively referred to as the alleged contraventions.
4. The respondent neither defended nor participated in the proceedings. In these circumstances, the Court is required to consider whether there is a proper basis for the Court to make the orders sought by the applicant in his default judgment application (Default Application), namely:

(a) declaration of the respondent's alleged contraventions;

(b) orders for the respondent to take steps to comply with the compliance notice;

(c) orders for the respondent to pay the applicant pre-judgment interest; and

(d) orders for the applicant to distribute the amounts paid by the respondent to the employee.

1. For the following reasons, I am satisfied that it is appropriate to make orders to that effect.

1. The Court has before it the following materials:

(a) The four Affidavits of Matthew James Gough affirmed on:

(i) 11 June 2025 (First Gough Affidavit);

(ii) 8 August 2025 (Second Gough Affidavit);

(iii) 15 October 2025 (Third Gough Affidavit); and

(iv) 17 November 2025.

(b) The Affidavit of Service of Arlen James Tierney filed on 3 April 2025 (Tierney Affidavit).

(c) The Affidavit of Service of Jarret Towns filed on 4 June 2025 (Towns Affidavit).

(d) The Affidavit of Service of Alan John Griffin filed on 17 September 2025.

1. Section 716 of Division 2 of Part 5-2 of the FW Act sets out the provisions concerning Fair Work Ombudsman (FWO) compliance notices:

Application of this section

(1) This section applies if an inspector reasonably believes that a person has contravened one or more of the following:

(a) a provision of the National Employment Standards;

(b) a term of a modern award;

(c) a term of an enterprise agreement;

(d) a term of a workplace determination;

(e) a term of a national minimum wage order;

(f) a term of an equal remuneration order;

(fa) subsection 536AA(1) or (2) (which deal with employer obligations in relation to advertising rates of pay);

(g) a provision of Part 6‑4C (which deals with the Coronavirus economic response);

(h) a jobkeeper enabling direction (within the meaning of Part 6‑4C);

(i) a provision of an agreement authorised by Part 6‑4C.

Giving a notice

(2) The inspector may, except as provided by subsection (4), give the person a notice requiring the person to do either or both of the following within such reasonable time as is specified in the notice:

(a) take specified action to remedy the direct effects of the contravention referred to in subsection (1);

(b) produce reasonable evidence of the person's compliance with the notice.

(3) The notice must also:

(a) set out the name of the person to whom the notice is given; and

(b) set out the name of the inspector who gave the notice; and

(c) set out brief details of the contravention; and

(d) explain that a failure to comply with the notice may contravene a civil remedy provision; and

(e) explain that the person may apply to the Federal Court, the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Division 2) or an eligible State or Territory Court for a review of the notice on either or both of the following grounds:

(i) the person has not committed a contravention set out in the notice;

(ii) the notice does not comply with subsection (2) or this subsection; and

(f) set out any other matters prescribed by the regulations.

Relationship with enforceable undertakings

(4) An inspector must not give a person a notice in relation to a contravention if:

(a) the person has given an undertaking under section 715 in relation to the contravention; and

(b) the undertaking has not been withdrawn.

Relationship with civil remedy provisions

(4A) An inspector must not apply for an order under Division 2 of Part 4‑1 in relation to a contravention of a civil remedy provision by a person if:

(a) the inspector has given the person a notice in relation to the contravention; and

(b) either of the following subparagraphs applies:

(i) the notice has not been withdrawn, and the person has complied with the notice;

(ii) the person has made an application under section 717 in relation to the notice that has not been completely dealt with.

Note: A person other than an inspector who is otherwise entitled to apply for an order in relation to the contravention may do so.

(4B) A person who complies with a notice in relation to a contravention of a civil remedy provision is not taken:

(a) to have admitted to contravening the provision; or

(b) to have been found to have contravened the provision.

Person must not fail to comply with notice

(5) A person must not fail to comply with a notice given under this section.

Note: This subsection is a civil remedy provision (see Part 4‑1).

(6) Subsection (5) does not apply if the person has a reasonable excuse.

Failure to give employee pay slip within statutory time limit

1. Section 536 of Division 3 of Part 3-6 of the FW Act sets out employer obligations in relation to pay slips:

536 Employer obligations in relation to pay slips

(1) An employer must give a pay slip to each of its employees within one working day of paying an amount to the employee in relation to the performance of work.

Note 1: This subsection is a civil remedy provision (see Part 4‑1).

Note 2: Section 80 of the Paid Parental Leave Act 2010 requires an employer to give information to an employee to whom the employer pays an instalment under that Act.

(a) if a form is prescribed by the regulations - be in that form; and

(b) include any information prescribed by the regulations; and

(c) not include any information prescribed by the regulations in relation to paid family and domestic violence leave; and

(d) comply with any requirements prescribed by the regulations in relation to the reporting of paid family and domestic violence leave.

Note 1: This subsection is a civil remedy provision (see Part 4‑1).

Note 2: If an employer fails to comply with subsection (1) or (2), the employer may bear the burden of disproving allegations in proceedings relating to a contravention of certain civil remedy provisions: see section 557C.

(3) An employer must not give a pay slip for the purposes of this section that the employer knows is false or misleading.

Note: This subsection is a civil remedy provision (see Part 4‑1).

(3A) A pay slip is not false or misleading merely because it complies with regulations made for the purposes of paragraph (2)(d).

(1) Subsection (3) does not apply if the pay slip is not false or misleading in a material particular.

Orders and penalties for contravention of civil remedy provisions

1. As stipulated in s 539 of Division 2 of Part 4-1 of the FW Act, applications can be made for orders regarding contraventions of civil remedy provisions. The alleged contraventions, which specifically concern ss 716(5) and 536(1) of the FW Act, are civil remedy provisions pursuant to s 539(1) of the FW Act. Each contravention has their respective maximum penalties that can be imposed pursuant to s 539(2) of the FW Act. The relevant provisions are as follows:
   1. Applications for orders in relation to contraventions of civil remedy provisions

(1) A provision referred to in column 1 of an item in the table in subsection (2) is a civil remedy provision.

(2) For each civil remedy provision, the persons referred to in column 2 of the item may, subject to sections 540 and 544 and Subdivision B, apply to the courts referred to in column 3 of the item for orders in relation to a contravention or proposed contravention of the provision, including the maximum penalty referred to in column 4 of the item.

(a) the Federal Court;

(b) the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Division 2);

(c) an eligible State or Territory court

for a serious contravention - 600 penalty units; or

otherwise - 60 penalty units

(a) the Federal Court;

(b) the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Division 2);

(c) an eligible State or Territory court

1. In relation to orders that can be made by this Court for a contravention of a civil remedy provision, s 545 in Division 3 of Part 3-6 of the FW Act provides:

545 Orders that can be made by particular courts

Federal Court and Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Division 2)

(1) The Federal Court or the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Division 2) may make any order the court considers appropriate if the court is satisfied that a person has contravened, or proposes to contravene, a civil remedy provision.

Note 1: For the court's power to make pecuniary penalty orders, see section 546.

Note 2: For limitations on orders in relation to costs, see section 570.

Note 3: The Federal Court and the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Division 2) may grant injunctions in relation to industrial action under subsections 417(3) and 421(3).

Note 4: There are limitations on orders that can be made in relation to contraventions of subsection 463(1) or (2) (which deals with protected action ballot orders) (see subsection 463(3)).

(2) Without limiting subsection (1), orders the Federal Court or Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Division 2) may make include the following:

(a) an order granting an injunction, or interim injunction, to prevent, stop or remedy the effects of a contravention;

(b) an order awarding compensation for loss that a person has suffered because of the contravention;

(c) an order for reinstatement of a person;

(d) an order requiring a person to comply, either wholly or partly, with a notice (other than an infringement notice) given to the person by an inspector or the Fair Work Ombudsman.

(3) An eligible State or Territory court may order an employer to pay an amount to, or on behalf of, an employee of the employer if the court is satisfied that:

(a) the employer was required to pay the amount under this Act or a fair work instrument; and

(b) the employer has contravened a civil remedy provision by failing to pay the amount.

Note 1: For the court's power to make pecuniary penalty orders, see section 546.

Note 2: For limitations on orders in relation to costs, see section 570.

(3A) An eligible State or Territory court may order an outworker entity to pay an amount to, or on behalf of, an outworker if the court is satisfied that:

(a) the outworker entity was required to pay the amount under a modern award; and

(b) the outworker entity has contravened a civil remedy provision by failing to pay the amount.

Note 1: For the court's power to make pecuniary penalty orders, see section 546.

Note 2: For limitations on orders in relation to costs, see section 570.

(4) A court may make an order under this section:

(a) on its own initiative, during proceedings before the court; or

(b) on application.

Time limit for orders in relation to underpayments

(5) A court must not make an order under this section in relation to an underpayment that relates to a period that is more than 6 years before the proceedings concerned commenced.

1. In relation to penalty, the Court has power to order a person to pay a pecuniary penalty if it is satisfied that the person has contravened a civil remedy provision under s 546 of the FW Act:

(1) The Federal Court, the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Division 2) or an eligible State or Territory court may, on application, order a person to pay a pecuniary penalty that the court considers is appropriate if the court is satisfied that the person has contravened a civil remedy provision.

Note 1: Pecuniary penalty orders cannot be made in relation to conduct that contravenes a term of a modern award, a national minimum wage order or an enterprise agreement only because of the retrospective effect of a determination (see subsections 167(3) and 298(2)).

Note 2: Pecuniary penalty orders cannot be made in relation to conduct that contravenes a term of an enterprise agreement only because of the retrospective effect of an amendment made under paragraph 227B(3)(b) (see subsection 227E(2)).

Determining amount of pecuniary penalty

(2) Subject to this section, the pecuniary penalty must not be more than:

(a) if the person is an individual - the maximum number of penalty units referred to in the relevant item in column 4 of the table in subsection 539(2); or

(b) if the person is a body corporate - 5 times the maximum number of penalty units referred to in the relevant item in column 4 of the table in subsection 539(2).

(2A) Despite paragraph (2)(b) and subsection (2AA), if:

(a) the civil remedy provision is a selected civil remedy provision; and

(b) the person is a body corporate; and

(c) when the application for the order is made, the person is not a small business employer; and

(d) the contravention is associated with an underpayment amount; and

(e) the application specifies that the applicant wants the maximum penalty to be calculated based on a multiple of the underpayment amount; and

(f) the person is not taken to have contravened the civil remedy provision under section 550 (person involved in a contravention); the pecuniary penalty must not be more than the greater of the following:

(g) the amount worked out in accordance with subsection (2AA);

(h) 3 times the underpayment amount.

Note: For when contravention of a civil remedy provision is associated with an underpayment amount, see section 546A.

(2AA) Despite paragraph (2)(b), if:

(a) the civil remedy provision is a selected civil remedy provision; and

(b) the person is a body corporate; and

(c) when the application for the order is made, the person is not a small business employer; the pecuniary penalty must not be more than 5 times the amount worked out in accordance with paragraph (2)(b).

Payment of penalty

(3) The court may order that the pecuniary penalty, or a part of the penalty, be paid to:

(a) the Commonwealth; or

(b) a particular organisation; or

(c) a particular person.

Recovery of penalty

(4) The pecuniary penalty may be recovered as a debt due to the person to whom the penalty is payable.

No limitation on orders

(5) To avoid doubt, a court may make a pecuniary penalty order in addition to one or more orders under section 545.

1. The applicant is a regulator who has standing to bring the present proceedings under s 539(2) of the FW Act.[1]
2. The respondent is a sole trader operating a business which provides car smash repair work services in New South Wales.[2]
3. In or around May 2022, the applicant commenced an investigation into the respondent's compliance with the FW Act regarding the respondent's employment of Mr Dalton Law (Mr Law).[3] Mr Law was employed on a full-time basis in the period 18 August 2018 to 12 April 2022 (Employment Period).[4]

1. Pursuant to s 716(1) of the FW Act, Fair Work Inspector Andrew Davies (FWI Davies) formed a reasonable belief that the respondent contravened various provisions under the Vehicle Manufacturing, Repair, Services and Retail Award 2010 (2010 Award) and the Vehicle Manufacturing, Repair, Services and Retail Award 2020 (2020 Award).[5]
2. On 30 August 2023, the applicant served on the respondent a compliance notice pursuant to s 716(2) of the FW Act by hand.[6] Under the heading 'Details of the contraventions', the applicant set out details of the respondent's modern Award contraventions, which were, in essence, as follows: [7]

(a) clauses 33.4, 35.3(c) and 35.3(d) of the 2010 Award and cl 16.10(b) of the 2020 Award by failing to pay Mr Law the minimum wage applicable to a full-time employee in accordance with his classification;

(b) clause 29.9(a)(i) of the 2010 Award and cl 29.4(a)(i) of the 2020 Award by failing to pay Mr Law a leave loading of 17.5% on annual leave taken by him during the Employment Period;

(c) section 90(1) of the FW Act by failing to pay Mr Law at the applicable base rate of pay for ordinary hours of work during periods of paid annual leave taken by him during the Employment Period;

(d) section 90(2) of the FW Act by failing to make payment to Mr Law for accrued and untaken annual leave payable on termination of Mr Law's employment; and

(e) clause 15.3(a) of the 2010 Award and cl 13.3(a) of the 2020 Award by failing to reimburse Mr Law for the cost of two textbooks purchased by him in connection with his apprenticeship.

1. Under the heading 'Required action under this Compliance Notice', the compliance notice required the respondent to do, inter alia, the following by 10 October 2023:

(a) calculate and pay the outstanding amounts owed to Mr Law as a result of the contraventions (as well as make a record of the amount calculated and paid);

(b) calculate and pay any such additional superannuation contributions required to be paid to Mr Law's chosen superannuation fund.[8]

1. The compliance notice also required the respondent to produce to the applicant reasonable evidence of his compliance with the requirements set out at [17] above by 17 October 2023.[9]
2. The respondent failed to comply with the compliance notice in accordance with the requirements referred to at [17]-[18] of this judgment. Accordingly, the respondent allegedly contravened s 716(5) of the FW Act.[10]

Failure to give employee payslip within statutory time limit

1. Pursuant to s 536(1) of the FW Act, the respondent was required to give a pay slip to Mr Law within one working day of making payment to Mr Law in relation to the performance of work.[11]
2. In the period 13 September 2019 to 18 April 2022, the respondent made payments to Mr Law in relation to his performance of work, but failed on each occasion to give Mr Law a pay slip within one working day of making payment to him.[12] Accordingly, the respondent allegedly contravened s 536(1) of the FW Act.

1. The applicant summarised the procedural history of the present matter in the outline of submissions filed on 15 October 2025. I adopt that summary, with revisions as required.
2. On 14 March 2025, the applicant commenced proceedings against the respondent by filing an originating application which also included a Statement of Claim (Originating Documents).
3. On 19 March 2025, the applicant sent an email to his gmail.com email address (respondent's Email Address), attaching a letter (March Letter) together with sealed copies of the Originating Documents.[13] The March Letter advised the respondent of the attendance details for a First Court Date on 7 April 2025 and informed him that he was required to file any response and defence within 28 days of service or, if no response is filed, to file and serve a Notice of Address for Service (NOAFS).
4. On 2 April 2025, the applicant (through a process server) personally served the March Letter and sealed copies of the Originating Documents on the respondent at his address in Coolah in New South Wales (respondent's address).[14]
5. Between 3 and 7 April 2025, the applicant called the respondent on three occasions on his telephone number ending in 3708 (respondent's Phone Number). On each occasion there was no answer. On two occasions the applicant left a voicemail requesting a return call from the respondent.[15]

1. On 7 April 2025, the respondent failed to attend the First Court Date.
2. On 29 April 2025, the Court made further orders (April Orders), including that the respondent file and serve a NOAFS and a response and defence. The respondent failed to file or serve a NOAFS by 19 May 2025 or a response and defence by 28 May 2025, as required by the April Orders.[16]
3. On 30 April 2025, the applicant sent an email to the respondent's Email Address attached to which was a letter (April Letter) and the April Orders. The April Letter informed the respondent of the attendance details for a First Directions Hearing on 12 June 2025 (First Directions Hearing), his obligations to attend the First Directions Hearing and to comply with the April Orders, and that the applicant may file a Default Application if the respondent did not comply with the April Orders.[17] The respondent confirmed that he received this email on 5 May 2025.[18]
4. On 1 May 2025, the applicant sent a copy of the April Letter and the April Orders to the respondent's address by express post.[19]
5. On 5 May 2025, the applicant called the respondent's Phone Number to discuss the proceedings. There was no answer, and the applicant left a voicemail requesting a return call.[20]
6. On 7 May 2025, the applicant (through a process server) personally served a copy of the April Letter and the April Orders on the respondent.[21] The respondent also confirmed that the respondent's Email Address and the respondent's Phone Number were his correct contact details.
7. Between 30 May 2025 and 11 June 2025:

(a) the applicant called the respondent's Phone Number on two occasions; on each occasion there was no answer, and the applicant left a voice message requesting a return call;[22] and

(b) the applicant sent an email to the respondent's Email Address on three occasions in respect of these proceedings, two of which attached a copy of the April Orders and informed the respondent that he was in default of the April Orders and the attendance details of the First Directions Hearing.[23]

1. On 12 June 2025, the respondent failed to attend the First Directions Hearing.
2. At the First Directions Hearing, the Court made further orders (June Orders), including that the respondent file and serve a NOAFS and a response and defence. The respondent failed to file or serve a NOAFS by 26 June 2025 or a response and defence by 10 July 2025, in accordance with the June Orders.[24]
3. On 16 June 2025, the applicant sent an email to the respondent's Email Address, attached to which was a letter (June Letter) and a copy of the June Orders.[25] The June Letter informed the respondent of his obligations to comply with the June Orders, and the applicant's intention to make an application for default judgment (Default Application) should the respondent fail to comply with the June Orders.
4. On 17 June 2025, the applicant sent a copy of the June Letter and the June Orders to the respondent's Address by express post.[26]
5. On 1 and 11 July 2025, the applicant sent emails to the respondent's Email Address advising that the respondent was in default of the June Orders and reiterating the applicant's intention to file a Default Application should he continue to fail to comply with the June Orders.[27]
6. On 4 August 2025, the Court made an order (August Order) listing the matter for a further directions hearing on 6 August 2025 (Second Directions Hearing).
7. On 5 August 2025, the applicant:

(a) called the respondent's Phone Number and left a message with a woman who agreed to take a message for the respondent in respect of the Second Directions Hearing;[28] and

(b) sent an email to the respondent's Email Address, attaching a copy of the August Order and providing attendance details for the Second Directions Hearing.[29]

1. On 6 August 2025, the respondent failed to attend the Second Directions Hearing.
2. On 8 August 2025, the applicant filed the Default Application with the Court.
3. On 26 August 2025, the applicant received an email from the respondent's Email Address, in which the respondent advised that he had been unable to attend the Second Directions Hearing due to not owning a video capable device.[30]
4. On the same date, the applicant sent an email to the respondent's Email Address, attaching a copy of the Default Application, the Second Gough Affidavit and a copy of the June Orders, and indicating that the respondent could request to appear at the next court date by telephone.[31]
5. On 27 August 2025, the applicant received an email from the respondent's Email Address, in which the respondent stated 'I will get those forms filled out by Thursday' and requested not to be personally served with the Default Application.[32]
6. On 28 August 2025, the applicant sent an email to the respondent's Email Address, indicating that the applicant considered it appropriate that the Default Application be personally served on the respondent.[33]
7. On 18 September 2025, the Court made orders in respect of the Default Application (September Orders), including for the matter to be listed, if necessary, for a hearing.
8. On 23 September 2025, the applicant sent a letter by email to the respondent's Email Address and by post to the respondent's Address, together with a copy of the June Orders and the September Orders.[34] By that letter, the applicant reminded the respondent that he remained in default of the June Orders and requested he file a NOAFS and a response and defence as soon as possible.
9. The applicant claimed that as of 15 October 2025, the respondent has not filed or served a NOAFS, response or defence in accordance with the June Orders, or at all.[35]

1. As stated above, the Default Application was filed by the applicant on 8 August 2025. The Default Application was listed for hearing before the Court on 18 November 2025.
2. In support of the Default Application, the applicant relied on the documents referred to at [6] of this judgment. The applicant also relied upon written submissions filed on 15 October 2025, and oral submissions presented at the hearing by Mr Giordano.
3. Rule 5.09 of the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia Rules (Division 2) (General Federal Law) Rules 2025 (Cth) (FCFCOA Rules) relevantly provides:

5.09 When a respondent is in default

For the purposes of rule 5.11, a respondent is in default if the respondent:

(a) has not satisfied the applicant's claim; and

(b) does not:

(i) do an act required to be done, or do an act in the time required, by these Rules; or

(ii) comply with an order of the Court in the proceeding; or

(iii) attend a hearing in the proceeding; or

(iv) defend the proceeding with due diligence.

1. Rule 5.11 of the FCFCOA Rules relevantly provides:

5.11 Orders on default - respondent

If a respondent is in default, the Court may:

(a) order that a step in the proceeding be taken within a specified time; or

(b) if the claim against the respondent is for a debt or liquidated damages - give judgment against the respondent for:

(i) the debt or liquidated damages; and

(ii) if appropriate, interest and costs in a sum fixed by the Court or to be taxed; or

(c) if the proceeding was started by an originating application supported by a statement of claim or an alternative accompanying document referred to in rule 8.04, or if the Court has ordered that the proceeding continue on pleadings - give judgment against the respondent for the relief claimed in the statement of claim or alternative accompanying document to which the Court is satisfied that the applicant is entitled; or

(d) give judgment against the respondent for damages to be assessed, or any other order; or

(e) direct that an order mentioned in paragraph (b), (c) or (d) is to take effect if the respondent does not take a step ordered by the Court in the proceeding in the time specified in the order.

Note 1: The Court may make any order that the Court considers appropriate in the interests of justice (see rule 1.08).

Note 2: An order or judgment under this Division may be set aside or varied.

1. The proceedings have been on foot since 13 March 2025. The respondent has been given numerous opportunities since the initiation of the proceedings to participate, but has simply not engaged in the proceedings at all. In these circumstances, I am of the view that the respondent is in default for the purposes of r 5.09.

1. The applicant, the Fair Work Ombudsman, is and was at all relevant times: [36]

(a) a statutory appointee of the Commonwealth appointed by the Governor-General by written instrument pursuant to s 687(1) of the FW Act;

(b) a Fair Work Inspector (FWI) pursuant to s 701 of the FW Act; and

(c) a person with standing to bring these proceedings and to apply for orders for contraventions of civil remedy provisions pursuant to s 539(2) of the FW Act.

1. FWI Davies was at all relevant times a FWI appointed by the applicant under s 700 of the FW Act. [37]
2. The respondent is, and was at all material times, a sole trader holding the ABN 43761940062, as well as a national system employer within the meaning of s 14 of the FW Act as extended by s 30N of the FW Act.[38] The respondent employed Mr Law on a full-time basis.[39] Mr Law was classified as a RS&R employee Level 2 R2 between 18 August 2018 to 23 January 2019, and as an adult apprentice between 24 January 2019 to 12 April 2022.[40]
3. During Mr Law's employment, the 2010 Award and the 2020 Award applied to his employment. The applicant contends that the respondent contravened ss 716(5) and 536(1) of the FW Act by failing to comply with compliance notice and give payslip to Mr Law within the statutory time limit.
4. An order for default judgment under r 5.11(c) of the FCFCOA Rules is available when there is a basis for the relief sought by an applicant on the face of the statement of claim, and the Court has jurisdiction to grant that relief.[41] There will be a basis for the relief sought where 'each element of the relevant civil wrong involved is properly and discretely pleaded'.[42] There is no requirement for proof of an applicant's claim by way of evidence[43] because, upon default, the pleaded facts in the statement of claim are deemed to be admitted.[44]
5. Given that the respondent has not filed a defence, the allegations of fact referred to above, and as pleaded in the Statement of Claim, are taken to be admitted.
6. I am satisfied that the discretion to order default judgment should be exercised in this case, as the respondent has failed to engage in the Court process notwithstanding that he was on notice of the proceedings and hearing dates. The respondent's continued non‑participation would effectively prevent the applicant from progressing the claim on behalf of Mr Law.

1. The applicant seeks declarations that the respondent contravened the following civil remedy provisions in the FW Act:

(a) section 716(5) of the FW Act by failing to comply with the compliance notice with respect to Mr Law, given to the respondent by FWI Davies on 30 August 2023 pursuant to s 716 of the FW Act; and

(b) section 536(1) of the FW Act by failing to give Mr Law a pay slip within one working day of making payment to Mr Law in relation to the performance of work.

1. The applicant also seeks orders that the respondent take steps to comply with the compliance notice, pay pre-judgment interest and distribute to Mr Law the amount paid to it by the respondent within 28 days of such payment having been made.
2. I will make those orders.

1. Accordingly, I make the declarations and orders set out at the commencement of these reasons.

I certify that the preceding sixty-six (66) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment of Judge Papadopoulos.

[1] Applicant's Statement of Claim filed 13 March 2025 at [1].

[2] Applicant's Statement of Claim filed 13 March 2025 at [3].

[3] Applicant's Statement of Claim filed 13 March 2025 at [4].

[4] Applicant's Statement of Claim filed 13 March 2025 at [5].

[5] Applicant's Statement of Claim filed 13 March 2025 at [5]-[6].

[6] Applicant's Statement of Claim filed 13 March 2025 at [7].

[7] Applicant's Statement of Claim filed 13 March 2025 at [6].

[8] Compliance Notice (Exhibit 1A) dated 25 August 2023 at [10]; Applicant's Statement of Claim filed 13 March 2025 at [8].

[9] Compliance Notice (Exhibit 1A) dated 25 August 2023 at [11]-[12]; Applicant's Statement of Claim filed 13 March 2025 at [8].

[10] Applicant's Statement of Claim filed 13 March 2025 at [10]-[11].

[11] Applicant's Statement of Claim filed 13 March 2025 at [13].

[12] Applicant's Statement of Claim filed 13 March 2025 at [14]-[15].

[13] Second Gough Affidavit at [10] and Annexure MG-5.

[14] Tierney Affidavit at Part D and F and Annexure A.

[15] Second Gough Affidavit at [12]-[13].

[16] Applicant's Outline of Submissions filed 15 October 2025 at [13].

[17] First Gough Affidavit at [6] and Annexure MG-01.

[18] First Gough Affidavit at [8] and Annexure MG-03.

[19] First Gough Affidavit at [7], [9] and [10] and Annexure MG-02 and MJG-4.

[21] Towns Affidavit at Part D and Part F.

[22] Second Gough Affidavit at [20] and [22].

[23] Second Gough Affidavit at [19], [21] and [22] and Annexures MG-7, MG-8 and MG-9.

[24] Applicant's Outline of Submissions filed 15 October 2025 at [20].

[25] Second Gough Affidavit at [25] and Annexure MG-10.

[26] Second Gough Affidavit at [26]-[27] and Annexures MG-11 and MG-12.

[27] Second Gough Affidavit at [28]-[29] and Annexures MG-13 and MG-14.

[28] Second Gough Affidavit at [31]; Third Gough Affidavit at [5].

[29] Second Gough Affidavit at [31] and Annexure MG-15; Third Gough Affidavit at [5].

[30] Third Gough Affidavit at [13] and Annexure MG-23.

[31] Third Gough Affidavit at [13] and Annexure MG-24.

[32] Third Gough Affidavit at [14] and Annexure MG-25.

[33] Third Gough Affidavit at [15] and Annexure MG-26.

[34] Third Gough Affidavit at [10] and [12] and Annexures MG-18, MG-21 and MG-22.

[36] Applicant's Statement of Claim filed 13 March 2025 at [1].

[37] Applicant's Statement of Claim filed 13 March 2025 at [2].

[38] Applicant's Statement of Claim filed 13 March 2025 at [3].

[39] Applicant's Statement of Claim filed 13 March 2025 at [5].

[40] Applicant's Statement of Claim filed 13 March 2025 at [5].

[41] Fair Work Ombudsman v Al Hilfi [2015] FCA 313 at [19], citing Arthur v Vaupotic Investments Pty Ltd [2005] FCA 433 at [3].

[42] Macquarie Bank Ltd v Seagle [2005] FCA 1239 at [24].

[43] Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Yellow Page Marketing BV (No 2) [2011] FCA

352 (Yellow Page) at [61] to [63]; [2011] FCA 352; (2011) 195 FCR 1, citing Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Dataline.Net.Au Pty Ltd [2006] FCA 1427 at [48] to [51]; (2006) 236 ALR 665. These decisions were decided in respect of order 35A, rule 3(2)(c), of the now repealed Federal Court Rules 1979 (Cth). Rule 5.11(c) of the Rules is in relevantly the same terms. See also Fair Work Ombudsman v Clark Projects Pty Ltd [2025] FedCFamC2G 24 at [41], citing Kazal v Thunder Studios Inc (California) [2023] FCAFC 174 at [223]; [2023] FCAFC 174; (2023) 416 ALR 24.

[44] Yellow Page at [62], citing Phonographic Performance Ltd v Maitra [1988] 2 All ER 638 at 644.