Australian Building and Construction Commissioner v CoreStaff WA Pty Ltd
Citation: [2020] FCA 893
At a glance
- Employees affected
- 1
What happened
Peter Selsmark, a 70-year-old with experience as a grader operator, applied through recruitment company CoreStaff for a position with Gumala Enterprises in the Pilbara. CoreStaff received the application but refused to proceed with Selsmark's employment. The client, Gumala, had expressed concern about his age. CoreStaff alleged the refusal was based on operational concerns, but the evidence showed age was a substantial factor.
What was decided
Justice Banks-Smith found that CoreStaff contravened s 351(1) of the Fair Work Act by discriminating against Selsmark on the basis of age. The Court found CoreStaff refused to employ a prospective employee because of his age. Gumala was also found liable for advising, encouraging and inciting this discriminatory conduct contrary to s 362 of the Fair Work Act. The matter was adjourned for penalty determination.
What it means for employers
Recruitment companies and client employers must not discriminate against prospective employees on the basis of age. Age-based concerns about productivity or suitability do not justify refusal to employ.
What it means for employees
Prospective employees aged 70 and over are protected from age discrimination. If a recruitment company or client employer refuses employment based on age, that may constitute unlawful discrimination.
Want this applied to your situation?
Reading the decision is free. FairWork Mate goes further — it reads the full case library and applies precedents like this one to your specific facts, citing the cases as it reasons. General information, not a guaranteed outcome or legal advice.
Every statement above is drawn from the published decision. Read the original here:
https://www.judgments.fedcourt.gov.au/judgments/Judgments/fca/single/2020/2020fca0893Want more cases like this?
FairWork Mate tracks Fair Work Ombudsman, Fair Work Commission and Federal Court decisions across Australia. The AI advisor answers plain-English questions grounded on the full corpus — awards cited, industry, penalty amounts and affected employee counts — with a citation to the underlying decision on every answer.
Individual case summaries on this site are free. Full-corpus advisor access is a paid product — Business Solo from $99/mo, 50% off your first 3 months for the first 100 signups.
Get notified on new Fair Work cases
Free email alerts when we publish new underpayment decisions, penalty orders, and workplace law updates.
Free forever. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
This summary was drafted from the published decision and reviewed before publishing. It is general information, not legal advice. For your specific situation, speak to the Fair Work Ombudsman (13 13 94) or a qualified lawyer. About these summaries & corrections →