Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 15 SEPTEMBER 2012

Employer liability for sexual harassment

Hall & Wilcox
Hall & Wilcox
Contributor
Hall & Wilcox

Hall & Wilcox

Hall & Wilcox is a leading independent Australian law firm. We are a national firm with eight...

View firm profile
Explore more from Hall & Wilcox

Recently an employer was found not to be vicariously liable for sexual harassment engaged in by one of its employees.

AustraliaEmployment and HR

In the recent case of Menere v Poolrite Equipment Pty Ltd and Anor [2012] QCAT 252, the employer, Poolrite, was found not to be vicariously liable for sexual harassment engaged in by one of its employees.

What does this mean for employers?

This case demonstrates that employers who have done 'more than merely have a policy in place' for preventing and dealing with sexual harassment will be better placed to avoid vicarious liability for sexual harassment engaged in by an employee.

The case in brief

Mr Menere was employed by Poolrite as a casual assembly line worker. On a number of occasions over a four month period in 2008, Mr Menere experienced unwelcome conduct from Mr Singh, another Poolrite employee, including inappropriate comments, gestures and physical contact of a sexual nature.

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from