A Former senior consultant at Oracle has won her sexual harassment claim against the software giant after proving recurring advances by a male colleague.
Rebecca Richardson has been awarded $18,000 in compensation by the Federal Court in Sydney after Justice Peter Buchanan found Oracle liable for the actions of another senior staff member.
However Ms Richardson's claim of economic loss as a result of the harassment was rejected by the judge because she had voluntarily left Oracle and found another job.
Ms Richardson, 43, claimed she was sexually harassed 12 times by Randal Tucker between April and November 2008 on business trips to Melbourne.
She told the court that on a business trip to Melbourne, while in the company of two other employees, Mr Tucker had said: "Rebecca, you and I fight so much I think we were husband and wife in our last life . . . How do you think our marriage was? I bet the sex was hot."
On another occasion Ms Richardson - an American who had transferred to Sydney from San Francisco in 2003 - told the court that on telling Mr Tucker she was taking a day off he replied: "We should go away for a dirty weekend."
She also claimed a group were discussing in November 2008 a boat owned by Mr Tucker, and when she asked him how big it was he said in front of the whole boardroom: "It has a cabin that's just big enough for you and me."
Ms Richardson also claimed Mr Tucker asked her out on numerous occasions, and had said to her: "I love your legs in that skirt. I'll be thinking about them wrapped around me all day long."
She told the court she had made it clear to superiors that she had wanted to leave the Victorian-based project with ANZ because of Mr Tucker, but was told she was too important to the prospects of securing a deal with the bank.
The harassment was subject to an internal investigation at Oracle, which upheld aspects of Ms Richardson's complaint.
Justice Buchanan said he came to the conclusion that Mr Tucker "embarked on a systematic course of conduct that is fairly described as sexual harassment", and "did not give honest evidence about these matters".
"Mr Tucker's conduct was persistent and ultimately callous. It was, I am satisfied, intended at least to demean Ms Richardson and perhaps to humiliate her. Perhaps it was Mr Tucker's way of attempting to get the upper hand in their disagreements, or before their colleagues and representatives of the ANZ Bank.
"I accept the factual elements of Ms Richardson's evidence about her encounters with Mr Tucker. Where their evidence is in conflict I prefer Ms Richardson's evidence about those matters. I accept her evidence about matters which were not witnessed by others."
However he rejected Ms Richardson's claims for more compensation based on economic loss, because she was neither demoted nor sacked from her job after making the complaint.
"In my view, this part of Ms Richardson's case was largely misconceived. In my view, Ms Richardson left her employment with Oracle essentially because it suited her to do so in the circumstances at the time. She resigned."
Justice Buchanan has yet to rule on the costs.