WORKPLACE RELATIONS

30 SEPTEMBER 2025

Sexual harassment - $305k awarded in sexual harassment case

A recent Federal Court decision has sent a clear message to employers and workplace leaders around Australia. In a landmark ruling, a former restaurant supervisor has been awarded $305,000 after being subjected to repeated sexual harassment by a colleague. 

This case marks the first court application of the 2022 legal provisions addressing harassment on the ground of sex – a category distinct from sexual harassment. It captures demeaning or hostile behaviour based on someone’s sex, even when not sexual in nature. In a clinical or medical environment, this might include dismissive attitudes toward female colleagues, sexist comments during team interactions, or undermining staff members based on their gender.

These changes were introduced under the Respect at Work legislative reforms (which included changes to the Sex Discrimination Act 1984 and the Australian Human Rights Commission Act 1986) and following further obligations under workplace health and safety (WHS) legislation. The laws place a legal obligation on employers to take active steps to prevent the risk of sexual harassment and sex or gender-based harassment at work. 

Prevention plan: Managing the risk of sexual harassment and sex or gender-based harassment at work

So, what are the facts of this case, why does this landmark decision matter and what are the key lessons for private practice owners and employers?
The former employee in the case made allegations against her former employer based on the following:

  • Sexual harassment 
    • Suffered from repeated sexualised comments 
  • Harassment on the grounds of sex
    • Pornography and explicit pictures shown in the workplace
  • Victimisation
    • Dismissive and hostile responses when concerns were raised
    • Defamation-style threats issued after complaints were made

The Court held that while the sexual harassment and victimisation allegations were proven, the sex-based harassment was not.  The Court did acknowledge that although the conduct was part of the workplace culture, it was not aimed at her personally but rather the workplace as a collective. 

How did the Federal Court determine the damages to be awarded to the applicant? The damages awarded included:

  • General damages for sexual harassment - $160,000
  • General damages for victimisation - $10,000
  • Aggravated damages (due to the manner of the former employer’s defence - $5000)
  • Compensatory damages:
    • Past economic loss (28 months of lost wages) - $90,000
    • Future economic loss - $40,000

Total = $305,000 (plus legal costs)

This case and subsequent ruling serves as a wake-up call to employers regarding the real legal, financial and cultural risks posed by unchecked sexist environments and the responses made by employers when complaints are made. Legal threats in response to complaints can constitute unlawful victimisation. It also highlights that conduct does not need to be physical to constitute sexual harassment, with courts now openly scrutinising workplace culture, not just conduct or acts made by individuals. 

What can you do as a practice manager to ensure you are genuinely meeting your obligations to take all reasonable steps to prevent sexual harassment? 

You must now go beyond basic compliance with the standard. Your approach needs to be one of proactive prevention and not just a reactive response. On 1 March, WHS legislation came into effect requiring employers to manage the risk of sexual harassment and sex or gender-based harassment at work. All of these changes mean you should:

  1. promptly review your policies to ensure your practice position meets the change in legislation and this case in particular
  2. conduct a workplace risk assessment 
  3. develop and implement a sexual harassment prevention plan in consultation with employees if you have not already done so
  4. ensure annual sexual harassment training is up to date and ensure all workers understand the prevention plan and policies which prohibit sexual harassment and sex or gender-based harassment at work
  5. develop a process that will trigger a review of the plan after a report of harassment and every three years.

As a practice manager, the case of Magar v Khan is worth reading. It makes it clear that a toxic culture and unsafe workplace is not just bad for morale, but a high legal risk. There is no point having the correct policies, processes and training in place if the workplace culture does not reflect them.

Every practice and workplace must be safe and respectful.

Culture is a tricky area to navigate. If you would like further information regarding taking a preventative approach to workplace sexual harassment, please reach out to the Workplace Relations Team on 07 3872 2264 or through email support at [email protected]