Landmark Federal Court Decision: ABC Found to Have Unlawfully Terminated Antoinette Lattouf’s Employment
On 25 June 2025, the Federal Court delivered a high-profile ruling in Lattouf v Australian Broadcasting Corporation (No 2) [2025] FCA 669, finding that the ABC unlawfully terminated journalist Antoinette Lattouf’s employment in breach of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) (FWA).
Background
Antoinette Lattouf, a prominent freelance journalist and broadcaster, was engaged by the ABC to host Sydney’s Mornings radio program for five days in December 2023. During this period, the Israel–Gaza war dominated global headlines and sparked polarised public debate in Australia.
Ms Lattouf had used social media to criticise the Israeli military’s actions in Gaza, reposting content from Human Rights Watch alleging Israel was using starvation as a weapon of war. Though this post mirrored reporting already broadcast by ABC News, it triggered a wave of public complaints, many from coordinated lobbying campaigns accusing her of anti-Semitism and bias.
Within hours of ABC management learning of Ms Lattouf’s repost, a decision was made to remove her from the remaining shifts. She was told to leave the premises and not return to air.
Key Issues in the Case
Ms Lattouf sued the ABC in the Federal Court, arguing her termination breached:
- Section 772(1)(f) of the FWA, which prohibits termination for reasons including political opinion, race or national extraction.
- Section 50 of the FWA, by breaching terms of the ABC Enterprise Agreement requiring procedural fairness in misconduct allegations.
The ABC denied it had terminated Ms Lattouf’s employment, claiming instead it simply changed her roster (which ended naturally at week’s end) and was entitled to stand her down from remaining shifts. It also argued any decision was based on her alleged breach of social media guidelines and loss of trust, not her political views or racial background.
The Court’s Findings
Justice Rangiah found:
- Termination occurred: The ABC’s decision to take Ms Lattouf off air and end her engagement early was a termination of employment within the meaning of the Fair Work Act.
- Political opinion was a substantial and operative reason: The ABC’s decision-makers were substantially motivated by Ms Lattouf’s political opinion—specifically, her opposition to Israel’s military campaign in Gaza.
- Procedural fairness was denied: The ABC failed to follow its Enterprise Agreement obligations by not advising her of the specific allegations or giving her a chance to respond before dismissal.
The Court rejected the ABC’s argument that removing Ms Lattouf was justified solely by breaches of its social media policy or failure to maintain impartiality. It found these explanations were pretexts or at least insufficient to displace the legal presumption (under s 783 of the FWA) that the termination was for a prohibited reason.
The Outcome
Justice Rangiah declared that the ABC:
- Contravened s 772(1) of the FWA by terminating Ms Lattouf’s employment for her political opinion.
- Breached s 50 of the FWA by failing to comply with its Enterprise Agreement.
The Court ordered the ABC to pay Ms Lattouf $70,000 in compensation for non-economic loss (such as distress and reputational harm) and set the matter down for a further hearing to consider any additional pecuniary penalties.
Why This Case Matters
This decision is a significant reminder for employers—especially those with public broadcasting or journalistic functions—about the importance of:
- Respecting employee rights to hold and express political opinions, even when controversial or unpopular.
- Avoiding knee-jerk disciplinary responses to coordinated public pressure campaigns.
- Strictly complying with enterprise agreements’ requirements for procedural fairness in misconduct investigations.
It also clarifies that “political opinion” under s 772(1) FWA includes not only holding views, but expressing them publicly—even on contentious global conflicts.
For employers and HR professionals, this case reinforces that:
- Dismissal decisions must be carefully considered and documented.
- A genuine, policy-based rationale must be consistently and transparently applied.
- Breaches of workplace procedure can turn even a defensible concern (like reputational risk) into an unlawful termination.
How We Can Help
Our employment law team is experienced in advising employers on compliance with the Fair Work Act, managing reputational risk, and ensuring sound, defensible disciplinary processes. We also assist employees who believe they have been unlawfully terminated on the basis of political opinion, race, or other protected attributes.
If you’d like to discuss what this decision might mean for your business or your rights as an employee, please contact us.

Senior Solicitor
Email: kristen@hntlegal.com.au









