A construction supervisor sexually harassed an apprentice carpenter by asking her for oral sex and saying 'what happens on the island stays on the island', a landmark Federal Court ruling has found. 

Justice Stephen McDonald ruled that Elisa Clarke, 43, was sexually harassed during three stints on the remote Southern Ocean Lodge redevelopment on Kangaroo Island.

Ms Clarke alleged she endured a barrage of crude and humiliating comments over five weeks between April and May 2023 while working for Beiler Constructions. 

Among the allegations, Ms Clarke claimed senior site supervisor James Emmerson asked whether her colleague, James Stott, who she was in a relationship with, had a 'sweaty d**k'.

Mr Emmerson also allegedly asked Ms Clarke for oral sex as they walked to the mess hall one morning. He denied making the comments. 

On another occasion, carpenter Julien Lenepveu allegedly asked Ms Clarke if she planned to introduce Mr Stott to her children - before laughing about the remark with other workers. 

Mr Lenepveu admitted making this remark, but told the court he didn't think it was sexual harrassment, just banter. The judge agreed.

In a separate alleged incident, Mr Lenepveu was accused of asking whether Ms Clarke liked anal sex. He denied that claim, and the judge was not satisfied that the allegation was established. 

Days later, Ms Clarke was told she would no longer be working on the island and would instead be placed on Adelaide-based sites before eventually texting the company she was 'done' in July 2023. 

She later launched legal action against Beiler Constructions, claiming it failed to protect her from the alleged conduct and underpaid her during her time on site.

In the first fully contested Federal Court case under new Fair Work Act protections, Justice McDonald found Mr Emmerson did sexually harass Ms Clarke on two occasions, in breach of the Act.

The judge was satisfied the oral sex request occurred because she told her family about it over dinner, shortly after returning home from Kangaroo Island in mid-2023.

Ms Clarke's mother Margaret told the the court her daughter appeared 'annoyed and offended' when she disclosed what had occurred. 

'At the end of the meal... Elisa blurted out that a guy had propositioned her with oral sex at work on the Island,' she said.

Ms Clarke said her daughter identified the man as Mr Emmerson and told her she had rejected the advance, saying: 'I'm not a home wrecker, you have a family.'

Justice McDonald said the fact Ms Clarke told both her adult son and her parents about the incident long before the lawsuit was filed strongly supported her version of events.

'In my view, it is highly improbable that Ms Clarke would have told Lachlan Clarke, her son, that Mr Emmerson had propositioned her if she did not truly believe that he had done so,' he wrote in his published decision. 

'I find it significantly more probable that Mr Emmerson did ask Ms Clarke whether she would give him a blow job.'

Justice McDonald accepted that even though Ms Clarke engaged in mutual banter at the work site - including in relation to sexual topics and jokes - Mr Emmerson should have anticipated the possibility Ms Clarke would be offended, humiliated or intimidated by his question.

The court also ruled the company itself was responsible for the conduct.

In addition to the harassment findings, the judge ruled the company had failed to properly pay Ms Clarke across a range of entitlements, including wages, allowances and superannuation.

The company was also found to have breached workplace laws by failing to provide payslips and not giving Ms Clarke a Fair Work information statement when she started the job.

The Working Women's Centre praised Ms Clarke for her 'extraordinary courage and determination' in pursuing justice through a challenging legal process that lasted more than three years. 

Chief executive Nikki Candy said by speaking up she held her employer accountable and paved the way for others to challenge cultures of sexual harassment. 

'The Court accepted the complainant's evidence in circumstances where there were no other witnesses to the conduct,' she said.

'The Clarke decision sends a powerful message to sexual harassment perpetrators that women will be believed, and perpetrators can be held to account even where the misconduct occurs in an isolated or private setting.'

The court will consider at a later date what compensation Ms Clarke is entitled to and whether penalties should be imposed on the company and those involved.