Slater and Gordon Faces Fresh Lawsuit Over Data Leak

A new legal claim alleges that Slater and Gordon failed to act on warnings about a payroll manager’s suspicious behaviour, leading to a mass email data breach and major reputational damage.

A new legal claim alleges that Slater and Gordon failed to act on warnings about a payroll manager’s suspicious behaviour, leading to a mass email data breach and major reputational damage. The lawsuit says the firm knew about previous misconduct but didn’t take proper steps, which led to over 900 employees receiving unauthorised personal and payroll data.


Slater and Gordon, a nationally known workplace law firm, is now facing scrutiny from two former senior HR staff. The latest lawsuit comes from its former chief people officer, who denies involvement in the well-publicised email leak and claims she warned the CEO about the likely perpetrator hours after the incident. The firm allegedly continued to treat her as a suspect, damaging her professional standing and mental health.


The former executive says she was overseeing an investigation into a minor gift card misuse involving the payroll manager, who later received around $60,000 in compensation after being suspended. Despite awareness of past criminal convictions linked to fraud and forgery under a different name, Slater and Gordon is accused of failing to implement adequate cybersecurity measures, even after the former staffer reportedly tried to access confidential systems.


Questions are now mounting about the firm’s internal controls and response. Many elements from the leaked email, which was initially dismissed as fictional, have been confirmed as accurate. The lawsuit contends this mishandling led to significant and ongoing personal, professional and financial harm for the executive at the centre of the controversy.


The fallout could further damage the firm’s reputation, with two ongoing lawsuits from former HR leaders painting a picture of systemic issues in HR and cybersecurity oversight. While not all claims are proven, the case highlights serious flaws in how the firm manages risk and employee data.