A recent Federal Court decision has highlighted the serious financial consequences for employers who retaliate against employees for raising workplace concerns. In the matter of Han v St Basil’s Homes – comprising the 2023 liability finding and the 2025 damages award – the Court held that the aged care provider had breached the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) by unlawfully terminating a long-serving nurse who raised complaints about discrimination, bullying, and patient safety.
The case serves as a cautionary tale for employers in all sectors, especially those managing vulnerable workforces or providing critical services.
The Facts: Nine Years of Service Undone by Retaliation
Ms Wei Han, a registered nurse of Chinese background, had worked for over nine years at St Basil’s Homes’ Lakemba aged care facility before her summary dismissal in January 2020. She had raised several written complaints between June and December 2019, alleging racial discrimination by predominantly Filipino colleagues, unsafe staffing practices, and mistreatment of patients.
Rather than investigating her concerns in good faith, St Basil’s issued a disciplinary warning in September 2019 for an incident involving workplace language – which the Court later found was not unlawfully motivated. However, following her more detailed complaints in December, Ms Han was subjected to an internal investigation and dismissed shortly thereafter. A complaint to AHPRA was also lodged against her the same day.
In Han v St Basil’s Homes [2023] FCA 1010, Justice Rares found that the termination amounted to unlawful adverse action under sections 340(1)(a) and 351(1) of the Fair Work Act, as it was motivated by Ms Han’s exercise of a workplace right (lodging complaints) and by her race. The Court rejected St Basil’s efforts to rebut the statutory presumption that the dismissal was retaliatory, noting a lack of credible evidence and procedural fairness.
The Damages: Over $380,000 Ordered in Compensation and Penalties
Following the liability finding, the Court in Han v St Basil’s Homes (No 2) [2025] FCA 448 assessed the damages to be awarded. Justice Shariff accepted that Ms Han had suffered economic loss, psychological harm, and a diminished future earning capacity as a result of the unlawful dismissal.
The Court awarded:
- $175,000 for past economic loss;
- $61,559.62 for future loss of earnings;
- $75,000 for general damages including pain and suffering; and
- $10,000 for anticipated out-of-pocket medical expenses.
In addition, the Court imposed $60,000 in civil penalties—$45,000 for racial discrimination (s 351) and $15,000 for retaliation against a workplace complaint (s 340). Notably, these penalties were payable directly to Ms Han, further emphasising the seriousness of the employer’s conduct.
Key Takeaways
This case offers critical reminders for employers and employees:
- Employees have a legal right to raise workplace concerns without fear of reprisal.
- Adverse actions taken shortly after complaints will attract scrutiny and trigger statutory presumptions under the Fair Work Act.
- Failing to provide procedural fairness or conduct an impartial investigation can render disciplinary processes unlawful.
- Courts may impose substantial damages and penalties—not only to compensate the worker but also to deter future breaches.
Contact us today for expert legal advice and guidance on your employment rights.