Ong v Dark Horse Entertainment Pty Ltd [2025] FedCFamC2G 2109

(1) the affidavit of the Applicant's solicitor evidencing service of the Originating Documents on the First Respondent and Second Respondent by registered post to their registered office and to the email addresses and which had previously been used by the Third Respondent in correspondence with the Fair Work Commission on 28 May 2024 (Third Respondent's Email Addresses);

(2) the affidavit of the process server, Mr Buxton, evidencing attempts for service made on the Third Respondent, including three attendances on the Third Respondent's Queensland address, being the address for the Third Respondent recorded on the ASIC Current Company Extract for the First Respondent, as the Third Respondent was listed on the document as a shareholding member of the First Respondent (Queensland Address); and

(3) the affidavit of the process server, Mr Speck, evidencing attempts for service made on the Third Respondent, including four attendances on the Third Respondent's Victorian address, being the address for the Third Respondent recorded on an ASIC Current Company Extract for the Second Respondent, as the Third Respondent was listed on the document as the sole director of the Second Respondent (Victorian Address).

1. Both process servers depose to being unable to effect service at the Third Respondent's Queensland or Victorian address.
2. Orders were made on 27 August 2024 granting the Application for Substituted Service and the Originating Documents were deemed to have been served on the Third Respondent as at 27 August 2024. The orders noted that the First and Second Respondent had been served with the Originating Documents in accordance with the Rules. Orders were made for the filing of material by all parties and for the Applicant to provide a copy of the orders on the Respondents. No appearance was made by or on behalf of the Respondents at the directions hearing on 27 August 2024.
3. On 15 October 2024 there was no appearance by the Respondents at the directions hearing and orders were made granting the Applicant leave to file any Application in a Proceeding for default judgment and for the Respondents to file any material in response. The Applicant was further ordered to provide a copy of the orders to the Respondents.
4. On 8 November 2024, the Applicant filed an Application in a Proceeding seeking that default judgment be entered for the Applicant against the Respondents by reason of the Respondents default pursuant to r 13.04(2) of the 2021 Rules (Application for Default Judgment).
5. The Application for Default Judgment was accompanied by an affidavit in support and written submissions. In the written submissions, the Applicant submits that default judgment should be entered into against the Respondents by reason of their failure to:

(1) file and serve a Notice of Address for Service as ordered by the Court on 27 August 2024;

(2) file and serve a Defence by 24 September 2024, as ordered by the Court on 27 August 2024; and

(3) attend the directions hearings on 13 August 2024, 27 August 2024 and 15 October 2024.

1. On 13 November 2024, the Court sent an email to the parties, including the Third Respondent's Email Addresses, notifying them that the Application for Default Judgment had been listed for hearing on 20 January 2025 (Notice of Listing). The Court's correspondence also requested the Applicant to provide a copy of the Notice of Listing to the Respondents, noting no Notice of Address for Service was on file for the Respondents.
2. On 20 January 2025, the Application for Default Judgment was listed for hearing. The Applicant was represented by Ms Kelly of Counsel and there was no appearance by or on behalf of the Respondents. At the hearing, submissions were made by the Applicant indicating that on 17 January 2025 the Applicant had been made aware that the First and Second Respondent had been placed into external administration. Pursuant to s 471B of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth), leave of the Court is required to proceed with the matter against the First and Second Respondent. Orders were made granting the Applicant leave to file any amended Application in a Proceeding for default judgment, together with any affidavit material in support. The Applicant was further ordered to provide a copy of these orders to the Respondents.
3. On 10 February 2025, the Applicant filed an Application in a Proceeding seeking that the Applicant be granted leave to amend the originating Application and the Application for Default Judgment pursuant to r 7.03 of the 2021 Rules. In support of the Application for leave to amend, the Applicant filed two affidavits:

(1) the affidavit of the Applicant's solicitor which annexed an Amended Application in a Proceeding (Amended Application for Default Judgment) and evidenced the steps taken to determine the external administration of the First and Second Respondent; and

(2) the affidavit of the Applicant detailing her loss.

1. On 2 April 2025, the Amended Application for Default Judgment was listed for hearing. The Applicant was represented by Ms Kelly of Counsel and there was no appearance by or on behalf of the Respondents. At the hearing, the Court identified issues in the Applicant's pleadings and the matter was adjourned and orders were made for the filing of an amended Statement of Claim by 4 April 2025.
2. On 7 April 2025 an Amended Statement of Claim was filed and served.
3. On 26 August 2025, the Amended Statement of Claim was again served on the First Respondent at its new registered address.
4. On 26 August 2025, orders were made adjourning the Amended Application for Default Judgment to 17 October 2025 (August Orders).
5. On 2 September 2025, the Applicant's solicitor filed three affidavits of service deposing to the service of the August Orders on the First, Second and Third Respondents. The Applicant's solicitor also filed an affidavit of service deposing to the service of the following documents on the First Respondent:

(1) Application for Default Judgment;

(2) Outline of Submissions filed 8 November 2024;

(3) Affidavit of Wallace Huang filed 8 November 2024;

(4) Orders made by Judge J Young on 20 January 2025;

(5) Application in a Proceeding for leave to amend Originating Application and Application for Default Judgment filed 10 February 2025;

(6) Affidavit of Alessandra Galletti filed 10 February 2025;

(7) Affidavit of Hooi Fen Ong filed 10 February 2025;

(8) Order made by Judge J Young on 2 April 2025;

(9) Amended Statement of Claim; and

(10) Orders made by Judge J Young on 17 April 2025.

1. On 17 October 2025, the Amended Application for Default Judgment proceeded to hearing. The Applicant was represented by Ms Kelly of Counsel and there was no appearance by or on behalf of the Respondents (Hearing).
2. Being satisfied that the Respondents were properly on notice of the Application for Default Judgment, the Amended Application for Default Judgment, the orders of 15 October 2024, the orders of 20 January 2025 and the hearings listed for 20 January 2025, 2 April 2025 and 17 October 2025, I determined it appropriate to proceed with the hearing pursuant to r 5.11 of the 2025 Rules.
3. At the Hearing, the Applicant addressed the Court as to the steps taken in the proceedings to date and the substance of the applicant's claim. At the time of the hearing, it remained the case that neither First, Second or Third Respondent had filed material in accordance with the Rules, the directions of the Court, or at all, and had failed to attend Court on all listed dates.

1. A Court may give judgment against a respondent pursuant to r 5.11(c) of the 2025 Rules when they are "in default". Pursuant to r 5.09 of the 2025 Rules, a respondent is in default if they have not satisfied the applicant's claim and have failed to do one or more of the things identified in r 5.09(b) of the 2025 Rules. This includes, relevantly, failing to give an address for service; failing to file and serve a response before the time for doing so has expired; failing to comply with a Court order made in the proceeding; and failing to defend the proceeding with due diligence.
2. When a respondent is in default, the Court may make orders as set out in r 5.11 of the 2025 Rules, which relevantly includes:

(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; ...

1. The principles guiding the Court's exercise of power with respect to default judgment are well settled.
2. Before the Court may make an order under r 5.11(c) of the 2025 Rules it must be satisfied that the document filed alongside the Application is in fact a Statement of Claim, which as a pleading, complies with the rules of pleading as set out in the Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) (FC Rules). The FC Rules apply to general law proceedings in this Court by virtue of r 1.06(2) of the GFL Rules. The Statement of Claim must plead at least one reasonable cause of action that supports the granting of the relief sought in the application, and "each element of the relevant civil wrong" of which the applicant complains must be "properly and discretely pleaded in the Statement of Claim": Macquarie Bank Limited v Seagle [2005] FCA 1239 at [24].
3. Rule 5.11(c) of the 2025 Rules only requires that there is a claim for the relief sought on the face of the Statement of Claim - it does not require proof of the claims made by way of evidence: Arthur v Vaupotic Investments Pty Ltd [2005] FCA 433 at [3]; Rathner, in the matter of Mildura Grand Pty Ltd (in liq) v Bendigo Skyrider Pty Ltd [2011] FCA 626 at [9]. Nonetheless, it is permissible to adduce evidence relevant to the relief sought: Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Dataline.Net.Au Pty Limited [2006] FCA 1427 (ACCC v Dataline.Net.Au) at [50] and [51].
4. The Court retains a discretion not to make an order under r 5.11(c) of the 2025 Rules, even if the preconditions for making an order are satisfied: Speedo Holdings B.V. v Evans (No 2) [2011] FCA 1227 at [20] (Flick J).

1. The Applicant's allegations in the Amended Statement of Claim are set out in the following paragraphs.
2. The Applicant:

(a) at all material times performed the work of a retail sale employee;

(b) was employed by the First Respondent, Dark Horse, from 16 February 2024 to 3 April 2024 (the Employment);

(c) was employed on a permanent full-time basis;

(d) was at all material times a national system employee within the meaning of s 13 of the FW Act;

(e) has standing to sue pursuant to s 540 of the FW Act with respect to the alleged contraventions of the Act which relate to the Employment.

(a) carried on a business with ABN 39 658 941 907;

(b) carried on a business in the retail industry; and

(c) was a person for the purposes of s 550 of the Act.

(a) carried on a business with ABN 53 675 024 487;

(b) carried on a business in the retail industry;

(c) had responsibility for making payments to the Applicant in relation to the Applicant's performance of work; and

(d) was a person for the purposes of s 550 of the FW Act.

(a) was a national system employer within the meaning of s 14 of the FW Act;

(b) was a person for the purposes of ss 45, 340, 341 and 342 of the FW Act;

(c) was an employer within the meaning of s 42 of the FW Act for the purposes of s 44 of the FW Act; and

(d) was an employer within the meaning of s 322 of the FW Act for the purposes of s 323 of the FW Act.

(a) was a shareholder of the First Respondent;

(b) was the sole director and shareholder of the Second Respondent;

(c) had responsibility for the management of:

(i) the First Respondent;

(ii) the Second Respondent; and

(d) was a person for the purposes of s 550 of the FW Act.

1. The Applicant was employed by the First Respondent according to a contract of employment.
2. From 4 March 2024, the duties of the Applicant included providing supervisory assistance such as assisting in the training of new employees.
3. From the commencement of the Employment until 3 March 2024, the Applicant worked at least 94.57 hours. From 4 March 2024 until 24 March 2024, the Applicant worked at least 134.37 hours. From 25 March 2024 until the end of the Employment, the Applicant worked at least 68.47 hours.
4. The Second Respondent made payments to the Applicant totalling $4,836.92 in respect of the hours worked by the Applicant, including:

(a) $1,927.12 in respect of hours worked by the Applicant from the commencement of the Employment until 3 March 2024; and

(b) $2,909.80 in respect of hours worked by the Applicant from 4 March 2024 until 24 March 2024; but

(c) no payments in respect of hours worked by the Applicant from 25 March 2024 until the end of the Employment.

1. During the Employment, in accordance with the terms of the Contract, the Applicant achieved weekly sales, totalling 152. The Second Respondent made payments to the Applicant totalling $1,008.00 in bonuses under the terms of the Contract in respect of the weekly sales achieved by the Applicant.
2. During the Employment:

(a) the Third Respondent on behalf of the First Respondent requested the Applicant to use her own motor vehicle in performing duties, including on or around Wednesday 6 March 2024, around the afternoon; and

(b) the Applicant travelled at least 1,501.6 kilometres using her own motor vehicle in performing duties.

1. The First Respondent has not provided to the Applicant:

(a) payments in respect of motor vehicle allowance;

(b) any payments in respect of paid annual leave or accrued untaken annual leave;

(c) any payments in respect of pay in lieu of notice of termination;

(d) copies of, at any time during the Applicant's employment:

(i) the Award and of the National Employment Standards through any means;

(ii) the Fair Work Information Statement;

(e) any superannuation contributions; and/or

(f) any pay slips.

1. On 19 March 2024, the Applicant sent the Third Respondent a WhatsApp message to the effect that she had not received sales bonuses in respect of the first working week (First Inquiry in Relation to Payment).
2. On 30 March 2024, the Applicant said to the Third Respondent words to the effect that the Applicant had not been paid her salary and bonuses on time and that she wanted to know when she would be paid (Second Inquiry in Relation to Payment).
3. On 30 March 2024 and 31 March 2024, the Applicant sent the Third Respondent a WhatsApp message requesting reimbursement of travel expenses and attaching a table of travel expenses the Applicant had incurred including in using her own motor vehicle to perform her duties (Third Inquiry in Relation to Payment).
4. On 2 April 2024, the Applicant sent the Third Respondent a WhatsApp message to the effect that she had still not received payment of sales bonuses under the terms of the Contract (Fourth Inquiry in Relation to Payment).
5. On 3 April 2024, the Applicant sent an email to the Second Respondent, which was also received by the Third Respondent, requesting all of her pay slips for the pay periods from the commencement of the Employment until 31 March 2024 (the Pay Slip Inquiry). On the same day, the Applicant said to the Third Respondent words to the effect that the Applicant was still owed salary and bonuses (Fifth Inquiry in Relation to Payment).
6. On 3 April 2024, the Third Respondent dismissed the Applicant from her employment.
7. By the conduct and actions as set out above, the Applicant submits that the enquiries made by the Applicant in relation to payment and pay slips demonstrate that the Applicant exercised or proposed to exercise a workplace right to make a complaint or inquiry pursuant to s 341(1) of the FW Act and that the First Respondent took adverse action within the meaning of s 342(1) of the FW Act by dismissing her from her employment. As a result, the Applicant submits that the First Respondent contravened s 340 of the FW Act which caused the Applicant both loss and damage.
8. By the conduct and actions as set out above, the Applicant submits that the First Respondent contravened cl 17.1 of the Award and s 45 of the FW Act by failing to pay the Applicant a minimum ordinary hourly rate of:

(a) $24.73 from the commencement of Employment until 3 March 2024;

(b) $25.68 from 4 March 2024 until 24 March 2024.

1. As a result of the contravention of cl 17.1 of the Award, the Applicant submits that the loss and damage suffered totalled $656.27.
2. By the conduct and actions as set out above, the Applicant submits that the First Respondent contravened cl 22.1 of the Award and s 45 of the FW Act in their failure to pay the Applicant the applicable penalty rate for ordinary hours worked:

(a) on Mondays to Fridays after 6.00pm;

(b) on Saturdays;

(c) on Sundays; and

(d) on public holidays.

1. As a result of the contravention of cl 22.1 of the Award, the Applicant submits that the loss and damage suffered totalled $688.36.
2. By the conduct and actions as set out above, the Applicant submits that the First Respondent contravened cl 21.2 of the Award and s 45 of the FW Act in their failure to pay the Applicant the applicable overtime rates:

(a) for the first three hours of overtime worked on a Monday to Saturday;

(b) for overtime thereafter worked on a Monday to Sunday;

(c) for overtime worked on a Sunday;

(d) for overtime worked on a public holiday;

for time worked:

(e) in excess of full-time hours of 38 hours per week; and

(f) after 6.00pm on Saturdays, being outside the span of ordinary hours

1. As a result of the contravention of cl 21.2 of the Award, the Applicant submits that the loss and damage suffered totalled $825.67.
2. By the conduct and actions as set out above, the Applicant submits that the First Respondent contravened cl 19.7 of the Award in their failure to pay the Applicant an allowance of $0.98 for each kilometre travelled when the Applicant was asked by the Third Respondent to use her own vehicle when performing her duties. As a result of the contravention of cl 19.7 of the Award, the Applicant submits that the loss and damage suffered totalled $1,471.57.
3. By the conduct and actions as set out above, the Applicant submits that the First Respondent contravened cl 3.3 of the Award in their failure to make copies of the Award or the NES available to the Applicant.
4. By the conduct and actions as set out above, the Applicant submits that the First Respondent contravened s 323 of the Act by failing to make payments to the Applicant in full in relation to the Applicant's performance of work, including in respect of:

(a) the Applicant's salary at the rates of pay under the terms of the employment contract, for ordinary hours worked from the commencement of the employment until 24 March 2024 on Mondays to Fridays until 6.00pm, pursuant to her safety net contractual entitlement under s 542 of the FW Act;

(b) the Applicant's salary, and additional wages in respect of penalty rates and overtime to which the Applicant was entitled, for all the hours she worked from 25 March 2024 until the end of the employment; and

(c) bonuses the Applicant was entitled to under the terms of the employment contract, pursuant to her safety net contractual entitlement under s 542 of the FW Act.

1. As a result of the contravention of s 323 of the FW Act, the Applicant submits that the loss and damage suffered totalled $6,777.33.
2. By the conduct and actions as set out above, the Applicant submits that the First Respondent contravened ss 90(2) and 44 of the FW Act by failing to make payment of accrued and untaken paid annual leave to the Applicant upon her employment ending. Accordingly, the Applicant calculates a total loss and damage of $637.63.
3. By the conduct and actions as set out above, the Applicant submits that the First Respondent contravened ss 117(2)(b) and 44 of the FW Act by failing to make payment in lieu of notice of termination to the Applicant upon her employment ending without it continuing until the end of the minimum notice period. Accordingly, the Applicant calculates a total loss and damage of $1,201.92.
4. By the conduct and actions as set out above, the Applicant submits that the First Respondent contravened ss 125 and 44 of the FW Act in their failure to give the Applicant the Fair Work Information Statement before, or as soon as practicable after commencement of employment.
5. By the conduct and actions as set out above, the Applicant submits that the First Respondent contravened ss 117(2)(b) and 44 of the FW Act by failing to make payment in lieu of notice of termination to the Applicant upon her employment ending without it continuing until the end of the minimum notice period. Accordingly, the Applicant calculates a total loss and damage of $1,201.92.
6. By the conduct and actions as set out above, the Applicant submits that the First Respondent contravened ss 116B and 44 of the FW Act by failing to make superannuation contributions for the Applicant. Accordingly, the Applicant calculates a total loss and damage of $1,562.88.
7. By the conduct and actions as set out above, the Applicant submits that the First Respondent contravened s 536(2) of the FW Act by failing to give payslips to the Applicant in respect of payments made to her. Accordingly, the Applicant calculates a total loss and damage of $1,562.88.
8. The Applicant claims that pursuant to s 550 of the FW Act, the Third Respondent, engaged in conduct that involved him in the Alleged Contraventions and that he had knowledge of the essential facts of the contraventions. This involvement included:

(a) being responsible for entering into and negotiating contracts of employment with employees of the First and Second Respondents;

(b) managing the daily operations of the First and Second Respondent;

(c) coordinating with the First and Second Respondent in relation to the payments made to the Applicant in respect of her performed work;

(d) was the recipient of the Applicant's enquiries in relation to salary, bonuses, reimbursement of travel expense and payslips; and

(e) informed the Applicant of her dismissal.

1. By the conduct and actions as set out above, the Applicant submits that the Third Respondent has:

(a) aided, abetted, counselled or procured the contravention; and/or

(b) has been in any way, by act or omission, directly or indirectly, knowingly concerned in or party to the contravention; and/or

(c) has conspired with others to effect the contravention.

1. The Applicant claims that in as far as the Second Respondent was not the employer of the Applicant, the Second Respondent engaged in conduct that involved it in the Second Respondent's Contraventions and that it had knowledge of the essential facts of its contraventions including:

(a) being responsible for, and having knowledge of, all payments made to the Applicant in respect of the Applicant's performance of work on behalf of the First; and

(b) being a recipient of the Applicant's Pay Slip Inquiry.

1. The Applicant further submits that the Third Respondent engaged in the conduct at paragraph [68] on behalf of the Second Respondent within the scope of his actual or apparent authority and had knowledge of the essential facts of those contraventions. Accordingly, the Applicant submits that the conduct engaged in by the Third Respondent was also engaged in by the Second Respondent pursuant to s 793 of the FW Act.
2. As a result the Applicant submits that the Second Respondent:

(a) aided, abetted, counselled or procured the contravention; and/or

(b) has been in any way, by act or omission, directly or indirectly, knowingly concerned in or party to the contravention; and/or

(c) has conspired with others to effect the contravention.

1. In addition to the declaration sought and as set out earlier in this judgment, the Amended Application for Default Judgment also seeks orders that:

(1) Pursuant to s 545(1) of the FW Act and the contraventions alleged in items (a) - (b), (d) - (h) and (j) of paragraph [2] above, the Respondents pay the Applicant within 28 days of this order, $13,821.63 in compensation for the following:

(a) $656.27 in respect of the minimum rate of pay under the Award;

(b) $688.36 in respect of penalty rates under the Award;

(c) $825.67 in respect of overtime rates under the Award;

(d) $1,471.57 in respect of motor vehicle allowance under the Award;

(e) $6,777.33 in respect of making payments to the Applicant in full, in relation to the Applicant's performance of work, under the Act;

(f) $637.63 in respect of accrued untaken annual leave under the Act;

(g) $1,201.92 in respect of payment in lieu of notice of termination under the Act; and

(h) $1,562.88 in respect of superannuation under the Act.

(2) Pursuant to s 545(1) of the FW Act and the contraventions alleged in item (k) of paragraph [2] above, the Respondents pay the Applicant, within 28 days of this order:

(a) $721.15 in compensation for loss of income between 3 April 2024 and 9 April 2024, this being the amount payable in respect of three working days at the salary of $62,500 per annum under the Applicant's contract of employment; and

(b) $2,000.00 general damages.

(3) The First, Second and Third Respondents be jointly and severally liable for any amounts ordered pursuant to items (1) and (2) of paragraph [73] above.

(4) Pursuant to s 546(1) of the FW Act, each of the First, Second and Third Respondents pay Young Workers Centre Incorporated, within 60 days of this order, pecuniary penalties fixed in the amount of $10,000 for the contraventions alleged in paragraphs [2] and [3] of this judgement.

(5) Pursuant to s 547(2) of the FW Act, the First Respondent pay interest to the Applicant on the amount owed in items (1) and (2) of paragraph [73] above within 28 days of this order, with the interest to be calculated in accordance with the applicable pre-judgment interest rate prescribed by the Federal Court of Australia.

(a) file a Notice of Address for Service as required by r 6.01 of the 2021 Rules;

(b) file and serve a Response and any Defence within 28 days of service as required by rr 4.03(3) and 4.04(3) of the 2021 Rules;

(c) comply with an order of the Court in the proceedings, being orders 2 and 3 of the orders made on 27 August 2024 and order 2 of the orders made on 15 October 2024 in accordance with r 13.04(2)(b)(iii) of the 2021 Rules;

(d) attend the directions hearings before Registrar Wilson on 13 August 2024, 27 August 2024 and 15 October 2024 ; and

(e) defend the proceedings with due diligence as required by r 13.04(2)(b)(vii) of the 2021 Rules.

1. I am therefore satisfied that the Respondents are in default within the meaning of r 13.04(2) of the 2021 Rules, or r 5.09 of the 2025 Rules.

Should default judgment be entered and a declaration be made against the Respondents?

1. I am satisfied that the Amended Statement of Claim filed 7 April 2025 and upon which the Applicant relies complies with the rules of pleading and properly pleads a cause of action that supports the granting of the relief sought. In particular, I am satisfied that the facts alleged in the Amended Statement of Claim establishes that the First Respondent contravened ss 44, 45, 323, 340 and 536 of the FW Act, the Third Respondent was involved, within the meaning of s 550(2) of the FW Act, in those contraventions and the Second Respondent was involved, within the meaning of s 550(2) of the FW Act, in the First Respondent's contravention of ss 44, 45, 323, and 536 of the FW Act.
2. The Court has a wide discretion to make declarations; including where, due to their default, a respondent is deemed to have made admissions. The requirement for a proper contradictor in declaratory relief proceedings can be met in a range of circumstances, including where a declaration is made by consent, where a party intends to oppose declaratory proceedings but subsequently decides not to, or where a party does not appear despite awareness that declaratory relief was sought: IMF (Australia) Ltd v Sons Of Gwalia Ltd (Administrator Appointed) [2004] FCA 1390; (2004) 211 ALR 231 at [47]; Geneva Laboratories Ltd v Prestige Premium Deals Pty Ltd (No.4) [2016] FCA 867 at [82]. Further, it is sufficient that there exists a party who has "an interest to oppose the declaratory relief sought" to make a party a proper contradictor: Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v MSY Technology Pty Ltd [2012] FCAFC 56 at [30] per Greenwood, Logan and Yates JJ.
3. Appropriate caution should nevertheless be exercised, and it is important to bear in mind the particular characteristics of an application for default judgment - in particular that default judgment is given on the basis of a claim as pleaded and in the absence of a Defence or contradictory evidence. Accordingly, it is appropriate to make clear that there has been no adjudication on the merits of the Applicant's claims and that the declarations are made on the basis of deemed admissions: ACCC v Dataline.Net.Au at [59]. This is done by including wording in the declaration to the effect that the declarations are made "upon admissions which the respondents in question are taken to have made consequent upon their non-compliance with the requirements of the rules of Court" as suggested by Kiefel J, as her Honour then was, in ACCC v Dataline.Net.Au at [59].
4. I am satisfied that this is an appropriate case for declaratory relief, and in making the declarations sought, an introductory phrase shall be included so as to ensure any reader understands the circumstances in which the declarations are made.

Should orders be made requiring payment of monies, compensation and interest?

1. On the basis of the admissions taken to have been made by the Respondents:

(a) compliance with ss 90(2),117(2)(b), 125, 116B, 323 and 536 of the FW Act and cll 17.1, 22.1, 21.2, 19.7 and 3.3 of the Award remains outstanding;

(b) the Applicant has not been paid amounts to which she is entitled; and

(c) adverse action was taken against the Applicant in breach of s 340 of the FW Act.

1. Accordingly, I am satisfied that it is appropriate to make orders of the kind sought by the Applicant that require the Respondents to pay monies to which she is entitled, compensation and interests of the amounts owing, pursuant to s 545(1) and 547(2) of the FW Act.

Should orders regarding penalty be made at this stage of the proceeding?

1. The Applicant also sought orders that the Respondents pay pecuniary penalties for the contraventions.
2. The question of what penalty (if any) ought be ordered will be determined following a further hearing and opportunity being given to the Respondents to address the Court.

1. For the above reasons, I am satisfied that the Respondents are in default for the purposes of the 2021 Rules and I am satisfied that the Applicant is entitled to the relief she seeks. Declarations and orders will be made as against the First, Second and Third Respondent.
2. As stated above, the question of what penalty (if any) be ordered will be determined following a further hearing and opportunity being given to the Respondents to address the Court.

I certify that the preceding eighty-five (85) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment of Judge J Young.