The decision confirms for the wider community that previous awards of general damages, made under the Australian Human Rights Commission Act 1986 (AHRC Act), have historically been assessed at a low standard. Presiding judge, the Hon Susan Kenny observed that:
“... [T]he general range of general damages in respect of pain and suffering and loss of enjoyment of life caused by sex discrimination has scarcely altered since 2000 and does not reflect the shift in the community's estimation of the value to be placed on these matters.”
Justice Kenny further stated that the AHRC Act imposes no statutory restriction on the amount of damages awards for sexual harassment. Rather, the power conferred on the court to award damages is broad, and should be limited only by need for such damages to be reflective of the loss and damage suffered by the victim, because of the unlawful conduct.
The determination of the trial judge at first instance to order the general damages sum of $18,000, then lifted to $118,000 on appeal, confirms the considerations and range the court will determine relevant to any future order of general damages in the area of sexual harassment.
The court ultimately makes clear however, that in any assessment of general damages by way of compensation, there must be a sufficient causal link between the respondent’s unlawful conduct and the loss and damage experienced by the applicant.
You can read the decision in full online here
