Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-l4dxg Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-07T18:27:35.677Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Rethinking Richardson: Sexual Harassment Damages in the #MeToo Era

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2025

Madeleine Castles ,
Tom Hvala  and
Kieran Pender
Madeleine Castles*
Affiliation:
The Australian National University, Canberra, Australian Capital Territory, Australia
Tom Hvala*
Affiliation:
MinterEllison, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
Kieran Pender*
Affiliation:
Centre for International and Public Law, The Australian National University, Canberra, Australian Capital Territory, Australia
*
The author may be contacted at madeleine.castles@anu.edu.au.
The author may be contacted at tom.hvala@monash.edu.
The author may be contacted at kieran.pender@anu.edu.au.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The 2014 judgment in Richardson v Oracle Corporation Australia Pty Ltd (‘Richardson’) had a seismic effect on workplace sexual harassment claims in Australia. Overnight, the ‘general range’ of damages awarded for non-economic loss in such cases increased from between $12 000 and $20 000 to $100 000 and above. The judgment has made Sex Discrimination Act 1984 (Cth) litigation considerably more attractive for plaintiffs and resulted in greater judicial recognition of the pain and suffering experienced by sexual harassment survivors. Richardson’s impact has also been felt beyond that immediate context, with the judgment cited in support of higher damages in discrimination cases and employment disputes. However, six years and over 40 judicial citations later, Richardson’s broader significance remains unclear—particularly following the emergence of the #MeToo movement. Drawing on a doctrinal analysis of subsequent case law and qualitative interviews with prominent Australian legal practitioners, this article evaluates Richardson’s legacy and considers how sexual harassment litigation may further evolve to reflect changing societal norms.

Type
Articles
Information
Federal Law Review , Volume 49 , Issue 2 , June 2021 , pp. 231 - 271
Copyright
Copyright © 2021 The Author(s)

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

The author is also affiliated with the Global and Women’s Health Unit, School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine of Monash University.

The author is also affiliated with The Global Institute for Women’s Leadership at The Australian National University. This research was approved by the Australian National University Humanities and Social Sciences Delegated Ethics Review Committee (Protocol 2019/773). The authors thank the interviewees for sharing their knowledge and insight. The authors would also like to thank Emerita Professor Margaret Thornton and Dr Gabrielle Golding for their input. The authors’ views are their own

References

1. (2014) 223 FCR 334, 366 [117] (‘Richardson’).

2. Ibid.

3. See, eg, Markus Mannheim, ‘IT Executive Rebecca Richardson’s Sexual Harassment Win to “Rock Employers”’, Canberra Times (online, 16 July 2014) <https://www.canberratimes.com.au/story/6138551/it-executive-rebecca-richardsons-sexual-harassment-win-to-rock-employers/>; Therese MacDermott, ‘Reassessing Sexual Harassment: It’s Time’ (2015) 40(3) Alternative Law Journal 157; Anna Casellas and Jessica Keogh, ‘Landmark Sexual Harassment Judgment Opens the Gate for Significant Compensation Claims’, Clayton Utz (Blog Post, 24 July 2014) <https://www.claytonutz.com/knowledge/2014/july/landmark-sexual-harassment-judgment-opens-the-gate-for-significant-compensation-claims>.

4. Richardson (n 1) 367 [118].

5. See below Part IV ‘Jurisprudential Impact of Richardson’.

6. Jodi Kantor and Megan Twohey, ‘Harvey Weinstein Paid Off Sexual Harassment Accusers for Decades’, The New York Times (online, 5 October 2017) <https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/05/us/harvey-weinstein-harassment-allegations.html>; Ronan Farrow, ‘From Aggressive Overtures to Sexual Assault: Harvey Weinstein’s Accusers Tell Their Stories’, The New Yorker (online, 10 October 2017) <https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/from-aggressive-overtures-to-sexual-assault-harvey-weinsteins-accusers-tell-their-stories>.

7. Australian Human Rights Commission, Everyone’s Business: Fourth National Survey on Sexual Harassment in Australian Workplaces (Report, August 2018) 8 (‘Everyone’s Business’).

8. Australian Human Rights Commission, Respect@Work: National Inquiry into Sexual Harassment in Australian Workplaces (Report, January 2020) 11 (‘National Inquiry’).

9. Ibid.

10. Ibid 29.

11. The interview methodology is explained further below: see below pp 23–4.

12. These include the Anti-Discrimination Act 1977 (NSW); Equal Opportunity Act 2010 (Vic); Anti-Discrimination Act 1991 (Qld); Anti-Discrimination Act 1992 (NT); Anti-Discrimination Act 1998 (Tas); Discrimination Act 1991 (ACT); Equal Opportunity Act 1984 (SA); Equal Opportunity Act 1984 (WA). For a discussion regarding the prevention of workplace sexual harassment by state and territory-based work health and safety laws, see Belinda Smith, Melanie Schleiger and Liam Elphick, ‘Preventing Sexual Harassment in Work: Exploring the Promise of Work Health and Safety Law’ (2019) 32(2) Australian Journal of Labour Law 219.

13. Note, some acts which constitute sexual harassment may attract criminal liability. For instance, in Victoria, pt 8A of the Crimes Act 1958 (Vic) prohibits rape, sexual assault, threats to commit a sexual offence and other acts of a sexual nature which are designed to elicit fear or distress in another person. Stalking is also prohibited by s 21A. It is worthwhile noting that ‘lesser’ forms of sexual harassment, which do not elicit fear of violence, are often not prohibited by criminal law. As such, more subtle but insidious forms of sexual harassment, such as persistent unwanted attention or communication, may still cause significant harm and distress without attracting criminal liability: ‘Criminal Offences for Harassment’, Australian Law Reform Commission (Web Page, 15 July 2014) <https://www.alrc.gov.au/publication/serious-invasions-of-privacy-in-the-digital-era-alrc-report-123/15-harassment/criminal-offences-for-harassment/> [15.35]. A sexual harassment claim may also be made under pt 3-1 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) (‘FWA’). However, Chapman notes that ‘although it appears that the behaviour of sexual harassment and other forms of harassment comes within the concepts articulated as types of “adverse action” in s 342(1) [of the FWA], there may be difficulties in establishing that causal connection of “because” and moreover there appear to be insurmountable barriers to holding the employer liable for that behaviour where, as is usual, the harasser is a co-worker of the claimant’ in Anna Chapman, ‘Part 3-1 Adverse Action and Equality’ (2020) 33(1) Australian Journal of Labour Law 107, 120. The introduction of sexual harassment provisions in pt 3-1 has been proposed: Victoria Legal Aid, Submission No 283 to Australian Human Rights Commission, National Inquiry into Sexual Harassment in Australian Workplaces (28 February 2019) 36; Australian Discrimination Law Experts Group, Submission No 423 to Australian Human Rights Commission, National Inquiry into Sexual Harassment in Australian Workplaces (4 March 2019) 44.

14. Other feminist academics credited with the emergence of the term sexual harassment include Lin Farley, Mary Rowe, Susan Meyer and Karen Sauvigne: see, eg, Lin Farley, Sexual Shakedown: The Sexual Harassment of Women on the Job (McGraw-Hill, 1978); Mary Rowe, ‘The Progress of Women in Education Institutions: The Saturn Rings Phenomenon’ (1974) Graduate and Professional Education of Women, American Association of University Women 1; Enid Nemy, ‘Women Begin to Speak Out Against Sexual Harassment at Work’, The New York Times (online, 19 August 1975) <https://www.nytimes.com/1975/08/19/archives/women-begin-to-speak-out-against-sexual-harassment-at-work.html?>; Ann Crittenden, ‘Women Tell of Sexual Harassment at Work’, The New York Times (online, 25 October 1977) <https://www.nytimes.com/1977/10/25/archives/women-tell-of-sexual-harassment-at-work.html>.

15. Catharine A MacKinnon, Sexual Harassment of Working Women: A Case of Sex Discrimination (Yale University Press, 1979) 3–4.

16. Ibid 27.

17. United Nations Decade for Women, GA Res 31/136, UN Doc A/Res/31/136 (adopted 16 December 1976) 112 [3].

18. Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women, opened for signature 18 December 1979, 1249 UNTS 13 (entered into force 3 September 1981) (‘CEDAW’).

19. Ibid preamble.

20. Ibid preamble, arts 2, 11.

21. Convention (No 111) Concerning Discrimination in Respect of Employment and Occupation, opened for signature 25 June 1958, 362 UNTS 31 (entered into force in Australia 15 June 1973); ibid (entered into force in Australia 17 August 1983).

22. Sex Discrimination Act 1975 (SA); Anti-Discrimination Act 1977 (NSW); Equal Opportunity Act 1977 (Vic).

23. Gail Mason and Anna Chapman, ‘Defining Sexual Harassment: A History of the Commonwealth Legislation and its Critiques’ (2003) 31(1) Federal Law Review 195, 199.

24. Ibid 200.

25. O’Callaghan v Loder [1983] 3 NSWLR 89.

26. O’Callaghan v Loder (1983) 6 IR 1, 2.

27. Margaret Thornton, ‘Sexual Harassment Losing Sight of Sex Discrimination’ (2002) 26(2) Melbourne University Law Review 422, 429.

28. O’Callaghan v Loder (n 25) 92.

29. Ibid 96.

30. O’Callaghan v Loder (n 26) 29.

31. Ibid.

32. Ibid 28.

33. Ibid.

34. Margaret Thornton, The Liberal Promise: Anti-Discrimination Legislation in Australia (Oxford University Press, 1990) 59; Sex Discrimination Act 1984 (Cth) s 28 (‘SDA’).

35. The Australian Human Rights Commission found that 85 per cent of women and 56 per cent of men have experienced sexual harassment in their lifetime. Seventy-nine per cent of perpetrators of sexual harassment are men: Everyone’s Business (n 7) 7–8.

36. MacKinnon (n 15) 174.

37. Ibid 192.

38. Aldridge v Booth (1988) 80 ALR 1.

39. Ibid 16–7.

40. Ibid 17.

41. Ibid.

42. Commonwealth, Parliamentary Debates, Senate, 9 December 1982, 3629 (Noel Crichton-Browne).

43. Commonwealth, Parliamentary Debates, Senate, 2 June 1983, 1187 (Susan Ryan).

44. SDA (n 34) s 28(3) (amended).

45. Hall v Sheiban [1988] HREOCA 5.

46. Ibid.

47. Ibid.

48. Ibid.

49. Ibid.

50. Hall v A & A Sheiban Pty Ltd (1989) 20 FCR 217, 242 (Lockhart J).

51. Ibid 261 (Wilcox J).

52. Ibid 263.

53. House of Representatives Standing Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs, Parliament of Australia, Half Way to Equal: Report of the Inquiry into Equal Opportunity and Equal Status for Women in Australia (Report, April 1992).

54. Ibid 262 [10.3.11].

55. SDA (n 34) s 28A.

56. Sex and Age Discrimination Legislation Amendment Act 2011 (Cth) s 54, inserting SDA (n 34) s 28(1A).

57. Australian Human Rights Commission Act 1986 (Cth) s 46P (‘AHRCA’).

58. Ibid s 11(1)(aa).

59. Ibid 46PO.

60. SDA (n 34) s 106.

61. Other remedies include a declaration of unlawful discrimination, an order requiring a respondent to perform any reasonable act to redress the loss occasioned by the discrimination and an order requiring re-employment or a variation of a contract: AHRCA (n 57) s 46PO.

62. Beth Gaze, ‘Damages for Discrimination: Compensating Denial of a Human Right’ (2013) 116 Precedent 20, 21 (‘Damages for Discrimination’); Margaret Thornton, ‘The Political Contingency of Sex Discrimination Legislation: The Case of Australia’ (2015) 4 Laws 314, 323 (‘The Political Contingency of Sex Discrimination’).

63. Hall v A & A Sheiban Pty Ltd (n 50) 239 (Lockhart J).

64. Elizabeth Raper, ‘Show Me the Money: Damages Awarded in Sexual Harassment Matters’ (2010) 1(3) Workplace Review 100, 100.

65. Ibid 101.

66. Hall v A & A Sheiban Pty Ltd (n 50) 238.

67. Ibid 239.

68. Ibid 238.

69. Shiels v James & Lipman Pty Ltd [2000] FMCA 2, 24 [79].

70. Ibid.

71. Johanson v Michael Blackledge Meats (2001) 163 FLR 58, 84–5 [118].

72. Lee v Smith [2007] FMCA 59, 161 [215] (‘Lee’).

73. Poniatowska v Hickinbotham [2009] FCA 680, 106 [353] (‘Poniatowska’).

74. Ibid.

75. Beth Gaze, ‘The Sex Discrimination Act at 25: Reflections on the Past, Present and Future’ in Margaret Thornton (ed), Sex Discrimination in Uncertain Times (ANU Press, 2010) 107, 112 (‘The Sex Discrimination Act at 25’).

76. Carol Andrades, ‘The Struggle to Restore Dignity—Part 1: Remedies in Anti-Discrimination Law’ (2012) 18(6) Employment Law Bulletin 85.

77. Dominique Allen and Alysia Blackham, ‘Under Wraps: Secrecy, Confidentiality and Enforcement of Equality Law in Australia and the United Kingdom’ (2019) 43(2) Melbourne University Law Review 384, 389.

78. Dominique Allen, ‘Remedying Discrimination: The Limits of the Law and the Need for a Systemic Approach’ (2010) 29(2) University of Tasmania Law Review 83, 84 (‘Remedying Discrimination’).

79. Christina Rich, a former partner at PricewaterhouseCoopers, settled a $11 million claim in 2008 after a three-year legal battle: ‘“Kisses Were Platonic”: $11m Harassment Claim Settled’, ABC (online, 28 March 2008) < https://www.abc.net.au/news/2008-03-28/kisses-were-platonic-11m-harassment-claim-settled/2385584>; Kristy Fraser Kirk settled her $37 million sexual harassment claim against former David Jones CEO Mark McInnes for $850 000: Fenella Souter, ‘The Damage Done’, The Sydney Morning Herald (online, 28 August 2014) <https://www.smh.com.au/lifestyle/the-damage-done-20140917-109cjm.html>.

80. Thornton, ‘The Political Contingency of Sex Discrimination’ (n 62) 319.

81. Ibid.

82. Ibid.

83. Gaze, ‘Damages for Discrimination’ (n 62) 22.

84. Allen and Blackham (n 77) 413–14.

85. MacKinnon (n 15) 172.

86. Richardson v Oracle Corporation Australia Pty Ltd (2013) IR 31, 35 [13] (‘Richardson v Oracle’).

87. Ibid 36 [15].

88. Ibid 38 [22]–[23].

89. Ibid 87 [211].

90. Ibid 87 [209].

91. Ibid 33 [1], 76 [164].

92. Ibid 94–5 [242]–[243].

93. Ibid 87 [211], 95 [243].

94. Ibid 95 [244].

95. Ibid 95 [246], [243].

96. Richardson v Oracle Corporation Australia Pty Ltd (No 2) (2013) 232 IR 99, 107–8 [39]–[41] (‘Richardson (No 2)’).

97. Ibid 107 [39].

98. Ibid 110 [51].

99. Richardson (n 1) 355 [81].

100. As required by House v The King (1936) 55 CLR 499 and Rogers v Nationwide News (2003) 216 CLR 327.

101. Richardson (n 1) 358 [90]. Cases cited include O’Brien v Dunsdon (1965) 39 ALJR 78; Clarke v Catholic Education Office (2003) 202 ALR 340.

102. Ibid 355 [79].

103. Ibid 355 [81], 359 [93], [95], citing Hall v A & A Sheiban Pty Ltd (n 50) 256 (Wilcox J), 281 (French J).

104. Ibid 363 [108].

105. Ibid 360–3 [96]–[108]. Cases cited include Swan v Monash Law Book Co-operative (2013) 235 IR 63, victim of workplace bullying and harassment awarded $300 000; Willett v Victoria (2013) 42 VR 571, victim of workplace harassment and bullying awarded $250 000; Tan v Xenos (No 3) [2008] VCAT 584, sexual harassment claimant awarded $100 000; Nikolich v Goldman Sachs J B Were Services Pty Ltd [2006] FCA 784, victim of workplace bullying and harassment awarded $80 000; Walker v Citigroup Global Markets Australia Pty Ltd (2006) 233 ALR 687, $100 000 awarded for breach of contract.

106. Ibid 362 [104].

107. Ibid 358 [89].

108. Ibid 366 [117].

109. Ibid.

110. Ibid.

111. Richardson (n 1) 358 [90]. Kenny J relied on O’Brien v Dunsdon (n 101), in which Barwick CJ, Kitto and Taylor JJ stated, at 78, that ‘the assessment [of damages] should be made having regard, as far as possible, to the general standards prevailing in the community’.

112. Ibid 360 [97]–[98], citing Amaca Pty Ltd v King (2011) 35 VR 280, 321 [177].

113. Ibid 363 [109].

114. Ibid 360 [96].

115. Ibid 359 [95].

116. Ibid 342 [26], citing I & L Securities Pty Ltd v HTW Valuers (Brisbane) Pty Ltd (2002) 210 CLR 109, 119 [26] (Gleeson CJ).

117. Everyone’s Business (n 7) 7–8.

118. Collins v Smith (2015) 256 IR 52.

119. Collins v Smith (Human Rights) [2015] VCAT 1029 (first instance), [3]–[4].

120. Ibid [3].

121. Collins v Smith (n 118) 94 [176].

122. Ibid.

123. Ibid.

124. Ibid 95 [179].

125. Ibid 89 [148].

126. Ibid.

127. Ibid 60 [18].

128. Ibid 85 [133].

129. Ibid 87 [140].

130. Ibid 95 [181].

131. Hill v Hughes (2019) 287 IR 86; Hughes v Hill (2020) 297 IR 323.

132. Hill v Hughes (n 131) 119 [241]; Hughes v Hill (n 131) 326 [10].

133. Hill v Hughes (n 131) 119 [251].

134. Ibid 113 [184], 117 [221].

135. Ibid 118 [234].

136. Ibid 118 [238].

137. Ibid 118 [235].

138. Hughes v Hill (n 131) 327 [16].

139. Ibid 334 [49].

140. Slattery v Manningham City Council [2014] VCAT 1442; Pop v Taylor [2015] FCCA 1720; Dziurbas v Mondelez Australia Pty Ltd [2015] VCAT 1432; Ingram v QBE Insurance (Australia) Ltd [2015] VCAT 1936; Butterworth v Independence Australia Services [2015] VCAT 2056; Ellis v FJM Property Pty Ltd [2016] FCCA 1798; Chalker v Murrays Australia Pty Ltd [2017] NSWCATAD 112; NSW (Department of Justice—Corrective Services) v Huntley [2017] FCA 581.

141. Trad v Jones (No 7) [2014] NSWCATAD 225; Jemal v ISS Facility Services Pty Ltd [2015] VCAT 103.

142. Bevilacqua v Telco Business Solutions (Watergardens) Pty Ltd (No 2) [2015] VCAT 693.

143. XVC v Joanne Baronessa (Human Rights) [2018] VCAT 1492.

144. Power v Bouvy [2015] TASADT 2.

145. Kovac v Australian Croatian Club Ltd (No 2) [2016] ACAT 4 (‘Kovac’).

146. Slattery v Manningham City Council (n 140) [64]; Jemal v ISS Facility Services Pty Ltd (n 141) [172]–[174].

147. Pop v Taylor (n 140) [296]–[298].

148. Lipman v Commissioner of Police [2015] NSWCATAD 250 [313]–[315]. Note, the majority decided differently as to whether discrimination and victimisation claims were substantiated, not whether Kenny J’s reasoning applied.

149. Collison v Brighton Road Enterprises Pty Ltd t/as The Grosvenor Hotel (No 2) [2016] FCCA 1798; Maritime Union of Australia v Fair Work Ombudsman (2016) 247 FCR 154.

150. Luke Colwell v Sydney International Container Terminals Pty Ltd [2018] FWC 174.

151. Kovac v Australian Croatian Club Ltd [2014] ACAT 41.

152. Ibid 3 [5], 46 [158].

153. Kovac (n 145) 23 [67], 24 [70].

154. Ibid 15 [43] (emphasis added).

155. Ibid 15 [42].

156. Ibid 15 [43] (emphasis added).

157. Ibid 16 [44].

158. Maritime Union of Australia v Fair Work Ombudsman (n 149).

159. Fair Work Ombudsman v Maritime Union of Australia (No 2) [2015] FCA 814, 1 [1], 5 [20].

160. Ibid 13 [64].

161. Ibid 8 [35].

162. Ibid 14 [70].

163. Ibid 16 [78].

164. Maritime Union of Australia v Fair Work Ombudsman (n 149) 163 [28] (Tracey and Buchanan JJ).

165. Ibid 164 [31].

166. Ibid 188 [148]–[155]. Justice Bromberg held that the quantum of damages awarded at first instance went beyond fair compensation for the harm incurred and thus were ‘manifestly excessive’. Undertaking a review of decided cases, Bromberg J reassessed the quantum of damages by ‘reference to prevailing community standards as illustrated by the cases surveyed’ and concluded that damages in the ambit of $7500–$10 000 were more appropriate: citing RailPro Services Pty Ltd v Flavel [2015] FCA 504.

167. Ibid 180 [111] (Bromberg J).

168. Heraud v Roy Morgan Research (No 2) [2016] FCCA 1797 [64]–[74].

169. Colwell v Sydney International Container Terminals Pty Ltd [2018] FWC 174 [81].

170. Ridd v James Cook University (No 2) [2019] FCCA 2489 [6].

171. Ibid [138].

172. Kovac (n 145) 15 [43].

173. Maritime Union of Australia v Fair Work Ombudsman (n 149) 180 [111] (Bromberg J).

174. [2016] QCAT 505 [220].

175. Ibid [219].

176. QCAT Act 2009 (Qld) ss 3(c)–(d) and 4(e); for a discussion of the duty of consistency as it affects administrative law in Australia, see Matthew Groves and Greg Weeks, ‘The Ongoing Quest to Define a Duty of Consistency’ (2020) 27 Australian Journal of Administrative Law 3.

177. Green v Queensland [2017] QCAT 8.

178. Ibid 45 [240].

179. Ibid 46 [247].

180. Ibid 47 [252].

181. Ibid 49 [261].

182. Ibid.

183. [2019] QDC 74.

184. Ibid 8 [31].

185. Ibid 8 [30].

186. [2018] VCAT 2014.

187. Ibid [126].

188. Dzirubas v Mondelez Australia Pty Ltd [2015] VCAT 1432 [241]; Ingram v QBE Insurance (Australia) Ltd (n 140) [270]; Jemal v ISS Facility Services Pty Ltd (n 141).

189. Sutton v BE Australia WD Pty Ltd (No 3) (2017) 272 IR 311, 336 [139].

190. An evaluation of the principle of ratio decidendi and the doctrine of precedent, and when courts may decide that a precedent such as Richardson is distinguishable on its facts, is outside the scope of this article. However, see, eg, Sir Anthony Mason, ‘The Use and Abuse of Precedent’ (1988) 4(2) Australian Bar Review 93 at 95 observing: ‘[t]he pressure on the courts to take a more active part in updating the law brings the doctrine of precedent into critical focus. The tension between the desire for consistency and predictability on the one hand and the desire for adaptability and justice in the particular case presents a problem for precedent. It calls for a doctrine which is sufficiently flexible and elastic to enable courts to share in the best of inconsistent worlds. And it explains why it is that there is a want of precision in some aspects of the doctrine’.

191. Mathews v Winslow Constructors (Vic) Pty Ltd [2015] VSC 728, [32].

192. Ibid [5].

193. Ibid [33].

194. Kerkofs v Abdallah (Human Rights) [2019] VCAT 259, [181]–[182].

195. Ibid [263]–[265].

196. Ibid [262].

197. Ibid [256].

198. Ibid [165].

199. Ibid [159].

200. Evans v Ikkos Holdings Pty Ltd [2019] SAET 222, [139]–[140].

201. Ibid [165].

202. James v Department of Justice, Corrective Services NSW [2017] NSWCATAD 238, [135].

203. Ibid.

204. Ibid [126]–[127].

205. Morton v Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (No 3) [2019] FCA 1943, [5].

206. Interview with Senior Barrister (Madeleine Castles, 19 December 2019).

207. Interview with Michael Harmer (Madeleine Castles, 28 November 2019).

208. Interview with Josh Bornstein (Madeleine Castles, 2 December 2019).

209. Interview with Joelle Grover (Madeleine Castles and Tom Hvala, 2 December 2019).

210. Ibid.

211. Bornstein (n 208).

212. Ibid.

213. Senior Barrister (n 206).

214. Huntley v State of NSW, Department of Police and Justice (Corrective Services NSW) [2015] FCCA 1827 (the claimant received $75 000 in general damages).

215. Senior Barrister (n 206).

216. Harmer (n 207).

217. Interview with Joydeep Hor (Madeleine Castles, 27 November 2019).

218. Harmer (n 207).

219. Grover (n 209).

220. Bornstein (n 208).

221. Hor (n 217).

222. Allen and Blackham (n 77) 385.

223. Ibid 398–9.

224. Ibid 412.

225. See Allen and Blackham (n 77); Allen, ‘Remedying Discrimination’ (n 78); Gaze, ‘The Sex Discrimination Act at 25’ (n 75); Thornton, ‘The Political Contingency of Sex Discrimination’ (n 62); Margaret Thornton, ‘Sex Discrimination, Courts and Corporate Power’ (2008) 36(1) Federal Law Review 31; National Inquiry (n 8); Interview with Kate Eastman (Madeleine Castles and Kieran Pender, 2 March 2020).

226. Bornstein (n 208).

227. National Inquiry (n 8) 557.

228. Bornstein (n 208).

229. Ibid.

230. Grover (n 209).

231. National Inquiry (n 8) 32.

232. Grover (n 209).

233. Thornton, ‘The Political Contingency of Sex Discrimination’ (n 62) 319.

234. Richardson (n 1) [83].

235. Ibid [89].

236. Allen and Blackham (n 77) 412–3.

237. Harmer (n 207).

238. Interview with Margaret Diamond (Madeleine Castles, 28 November 2019).

239. Ibid.

240. Harmer (n 207).

241. Senior Barrister (n 206).

242. Ibid.

243. Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) s 43; Federal Circuit Court of Australia Act 1999 (Cth) s 79.

244. National Inquiry (n 8) 29.

245. Richardson v Oracle (n 86) [39]–[41].

246. See, eg, Jeff Giddings, ‘Rhyme and Reason in the Uncertain Development of Legal Aid in Australia’ in Asher Flynn and Jacqueline Hodgson (eds), Access to Justice and Legal Aid (Hart Publishing, 2017) 43.

247. Australian Government Productivity Commission, Access to Justice Arrangements Volume 2 (Inquiry Report No 72, 5 September 2014) 734.

248. Gaze, ‘Damages for Discrimination’ (n 62) 22.

249. Australian Government Productivity Commission (n 247) 716–17.

250. National Inquiry (n 8) 38; Asher Flynn et al, ‘Legal Aid and Access to Legal Representation: Redefining the Right to a Fair Trial’ (2016) 40(1) Melbourne University Law Review 207, 208.

251. Kingsford Legal Centre, Redfern Legal Centre, Women’s Legal Service NSW and the National Association of Community Legal Centres, Submission No 450 to Australian Human Rights Commission, National Inquiry into Sexual Harassment in Australian Workplaces (29 March 2019) 33.

252. Ibid.

253. National Inquiry (n 8) Recommendation 25.

254. Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) s 570.

255. Hor (n 217).

256. Ibid.

257. Senior Barrister (n 206); Eastman (n 225).

258. Eastman (n 225).

259. Ibid.

260. Senior Barrister (n 206).

261. Ibid.

262. Ibid.

263. Ibid.

264. Bornstein (n 208).

265. Diamond (n 238).

266. Richardson v Oracle (n 86) [20].

267. Ibid.

268. Ibid.

269. Richardson (No 2) (n 96).

270. Ibid [51].

271. Thornton, ‘Sexual Harassment Losing Sight of Sex Discrimination’ (n 27) 429–30.

272. Ibid 424.

273. National Inquiry (n 8) [3.4].

274. Thornton, ‘Sexual Harassment Losing Sight of Sex Discrimination’ (n 27) 423.

275. MacKinnon (n 15) 173.

276. Ibid 424.

277. AHRCA (n 57) s 46PO(1).

278. Thornton, ‘The Political Contingency of Sex Discrimination’ (n 62) 319; Thornton, ‘Sex Discrimination, Courts and Corporate Power’ (n 225) 35.

279. Eastman (n 225).

280. Ibid.

281. Ibid.

282. Interview with Jenny Inness (Madeleine Castles, 28 November 2019).

283. Bornstein (n 208).

284. Ibid (emphasis added).

285. The authors acknowledge that it is difficult to make a wholesale comparison between sexual harassment and other areas of law, as courts determine damages on a case-by-case basis, with awards of damages often fact-specific. Damages vary considerably, even within defined areas, making it very difficult to benchmark average awards. Despite this, a general comparison provides a useful demonstration of the range of damages awards available to the courts.

286. Richardson (n 1) [104].

287. University of Technology Sydney Centre for Media Transition, Trends in Digital Defamation: Defendants, Plaintiffs, Platforms (Report, 2018) 5.

288. Most recently, Geoffrey Rush was awarded $850 000 in general damages, for the ‘devastating…hurt to his feelings occasioned by allegations of sexual harassment’: Rush v Nationwide News Pty Ltd (No 7) [2019] FCA 496, [789], [792].

289. Swan v Monash Law Book Co-operative (n 105) [264].

290. Elliott v Nanda (2001) 111 FCR 240, [107] (‘Elliott’).

291. Ibid [173].

292. Ibid [178].

293. Anti-Discrimination Act 1977 (NSW) s 108(2)(a); Anti-Discrimination Act 1992 (NT) s 88(1)(b); Anti-Discrimination Regulations 1994 (NT) reg 2; Equal Opportunity Act 1984 (WA) s 127(b)(i).

294. Carol Andrades, ‘What Price Dignity?—Remedies in Australian Anti-Discrimination Law’ (Research Paper 13, Parliamentary Library, Parliament of Australia, 12 May 1998).

295. Law Council of Australia, Submission No 249 to Australian Human Rights Commission, National Inquiry into Sexual Harassment in Australian Workplaces (26 February 2019) [111].

296. For a detailed analysis of the serious impacts of sexual harassment, see National Inquiry (n 8) 257–98.

297. National Inquiry (n 8) 45.

298. Senior Barrister (n 206); Eastman (n 225).

299. Allen and Blackham (n 77) 399–400.

300. Everyone’s Business (n 7) 67.

301. Sara Charlesworth, Paula McDonald and Somali Cerise, ‘Naming and Claiming Workplace Sexual Harassment in Australia’ (2011) 46(2) Australian Journal of Social Issues 141, 154–5.

302. Thornton, ‘Sexual Harassment Losing Sight of Sex Discrimination’ (n 27) 442–3.

303. Ibid 154–5.

304. Hor (n 217).

305. Everyone’s Business (n 7) 68.

306. Ibid.

307. Harmer (n 207).

308. MacKinnon (n 15) 27.

309. Hall v A & A Sheiban Pty Ltd (n 50) 238–9 (Lockhart J).

310. Hor (n 217) (emphasis added).

311. McGuire v Reyes t/as The Entrance Lakehouse [2017] NSWCATAD 50, [59].

312. Ibid.

313. Ibid.

314. Ibid [61].

315. MacDermott (n 3) 158.

316. Gaze, ‘Damages for Discrimination’ (n 62) 23.

317. Ibid; MacDermott (n 3) 158. Note, although available in discrimination cases, aggravated damages are directed at ‘compensat[ing] the victim for damage occasioned by the defendant’s aggravating conduct and not to punish the defendant’: Raper (n 64) 100.

318. Wotton v Queensland (No 5) [2016] FCA 1457, [1788].

319. Eastman (n 225).

320. MacDermott (n 3) 159–60.

321. SDA (n 34) s 3(b).

322. Ibid s 3(c).

323. Dominique Allen, ‘Behind the Conciliation Doors: Settling Discrimination Complaints in Victoria’ (2009) 18(3) Griffith Law Review 778, 789.

324. Eastman (n 225).

325. Ibid.

326. Ibid.

327. Ibid.

328. Ibid.

329. Ibid.

330. Senior Barrister (n 206).

331. Allen, ‘Remedying Discrimination’ (n 78) 88.

332. Grover (n 209).

333. Eastman (n 225).

334. Ibid.

335. Ibid.

336. Ibid.

337. Bornstein (n 208).

338. Diamond (n 238).

339. Harmer (n 207).

340. Bornstein (n 208).

341. Ibid.

342. Ibid.

343. National Inquiry (n 8).

344. Ibid 10.

345. Ibid.

346. Ibid 29.

347. Hughes v Hill (n 131).

348. Jan Ransom, ‘Harvey Weinstein’s Stunning Downfall: 23 Years in Prison’, The New York Times (online, 11 March 2020) <https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/11/nyregion/harvey-weinstein-sentencing.html>.

349. Kate McClymont and Jacqueline Maley, ‘High Court Inquiry Finds Former Justice Dyson Heydon Sexually Harassed Associates’, The Sydney Morning Herald (online, 22 June 2020) <https://www.smh.com.au/national/high-court-inquiry-finds-former-justice-dyson-heydon-sexually-harassed-associates-20200622-p5550w.html>.

350. Inness (n 282).

351. National Inquiry (n 8) 10.

352. Bornstein (n 208).