The Federal Court’s ruling that the ABC unlawfully terminated journalist Antoinette Lattouf is more than a win for one employee. It’s a clear reminder that every worker—whether in a newsroom, a factory, or a hospital ward—has the right to fair treatment and a voice in the process. Here’s what happened, why it matters, and how the lessons translate to WorkCover and serious-injury claims.

1. Background of the Case

In December 2023, Antoinette Lattouf was three days into a five-day fill-in contract on ABC Radio Sydney when managers abruptly took her off air. The trigger? An Instagram repost of a Human Rights Watch report on Gaza. An “orchestrated campaign by pro-Israel lobbyists” flooded the ABC with complaints, sending senior executives into what the court later called “a state of panic” The Guardian.
Lattouf lodged an unlawful-termination claim under s 772(1) Fair Work Act, arguing she was dismissed for her political opinion and, in part, her race. She sought redress through the Fair Work Commission before taking her fight to the Federal Court.

2. Legal Issue and Process

At its heart, the case tested whether an employer can end a contract simply because an employee expresses a lawful political opinion. During hearings, emails revealed the ABC moved swiftly to “appease” lobbyists—ignoring its own misconduct procedures and denying Lattouf a chance to respond The Guardian.
Key questions for the court:

  • Liability — Did ABC decision-makers breach the Fair Work Act?
  • Procedural fairness — Was Lattouf given any real opportunity to present her side?
  • Causation — Was the dismissal motivated by political opinion, race, or both?

Justice Darryl Rangiah found the termination was unlawful because political opinion was a “substantial and operative” reason. However, racial discrimination was not proven.

3. Outcome and Orders
  • Unlawful termination confirmed.
  • Compensation of $70,000 awarded for non-economic loss.
  • A separate hearing will consider civil penalties to deter repeat behaviour.
  • ABC’s managing director issued a public apology and pledged policy reform The Guardian.
4. Why It Matters — Lessons for Injured Workers & Referrers

Key Take-away:

  1. Fair process is non-negotiable. Even the ABC must follow its own rules before ending employment. In WorkCover disputes, insurers must consider independent medical examinations (IMEs) and provide reasons before cutting weekly payments or assessing capacity for employment.
  2. Political opinion is protected. The court reinforced that lawful speech can’t be punished. Similarly, an injured worker’s advocacy for safe conditions or a return-to-work plan can’t justify adverse action.
  3. Documentation wins cases. Internal emails showed the real motive for the dismissal. Keep every letter, IME report, and liability decision. Evidence of inconsistent treatment can turn the tide in a serious injury claim or appeal.
  4. Damages include emotional harm. The judge accepted psychiatric evidence of distress. Chronic pain, anxiety, and loss of earning capacity are compensable under the Workplace Injury Rehabilitation and Compensation Act when properly documented.
  5. Advocacy changes outcomes. Lattouf’s legal team pushed for accountability and broader reform. Allied-health referrers play the same role: clear reports on future loss of earnings give workers the best chance of a fair settlement.
Legal Insight

Justice Rangiah observed that ABC executives acted in “a state of panic” and sought to “appease the pro-Israel lobbyists” rather than conduct a measured investigation The Guardian. That credibility finding proved decisive—reminding every employer that knee-jerk decisions rarely survive legal scrutiny.

Final Word

Whether you’re contesting a sudden dismissal or fighting for WorkCover benefits, due process, evidence, and expert advocacy are your strongest allies.
If your claim has been rejected, PRD Legal may be able to help. Reach out for a confidential chat about your next steps.