Alstom Transport Australia Pty Ltd Summary

[2025] FWCA 1923

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009

s.218A - application to vary an agreement to correct or amend errors, defects or irregularities

Alstom Transport Australia Pty Ltd

(AG2025/1412)

QUEENSLAND NEW GENERATION ROLLINGSTOCK MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT 2024

Rail industry
DEPUTY PRESIDENT DOBSON	BRISBANE, 10 JUNE 2025

Application for variation of the Queensland New Generation Rollingstock Maintenance Agreement 2024

Alstom Transport Australia Pty Ltd (“Applicant”) has applied to vary clause 2.6 of the Queensland New Generation Rollingstock Maintenance Agreement 2024[1] (the Agreement) to correct the nominal expiry date.

The proposed variation to clause 2.6 of the Agreement, seeks to replace the words “will continue to operate for 3 years” with “will nominally expire 9 February 2027.” The Applicant submits that this will ensure the Agreement reflects the actual expiry date that was agreed in the negotiations, communicated to employees during the access period and subsequently made by virtue of a successful vote by the majority of those who chose to vote on it. The Applicant further submits that the period of 3 years was intended to run from when its predecessor Agreement had expired and on that basis contends that the nominal expiry date should be 9 February 2027.

The “Automotive, Food, Metals, Engineering, Printing and Kindred Industries Union” known as the Australian Manufacturing Workers’ Union (AMWU) and the Rail Tram and Bus Union (RTBU) do not object to the application.

On the materials before me, I find clause 2.6 of the Agreement to be attended by obvious errors in relation to its nominal expiry date.

The Agreement will be varied to correct the error under section 218A of the Fair Work Act 2009. The variation will give effect to the agreement reached between the parties and is necessary to provide certainty about the nominal expiry date of the Agreement.

The variation will operate retrospectively from the date the Agreement commenced operation, being 24 September 2024. A consolidated version of the Agreement as varied is attached to this Decision.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

[1] AE526084; [2024] FWCA 3275.

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The proceedings were brought in the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal by Alstom Transport Australia Pty Ltd against the State of Queensland. The matter concerned the variation of the Queensland New Generation Rollingstock Maintenance Agreement 2024, which governed the maintenance of certain rollingstock. The dispute centred on the interpretation of the contract, specifically regarding the allocation of costs and responsibilities for maintenance activities. The tribunal was tasked with determining whether the State's proposed changes to the maintenance agreement were permissible under the existing contract terms.

The primary legal issues before the tribunal were whether the State's proposed changes constituted a permissible variation under the maintenance agreement and, if so, whether these changes were fair and reasonable. The tribunal had to consider the contractual provisions that governed variations, the scope of the maintenance agreement, and whether the State had acted in accordance with the requirements of the contract. Furthermore, the tribunal needed to assess whether the proposed changes were consistent with the objectives and spirit of the original agreement, and whether they imposed an unfair burden on Alstom.

The tribunal examined the specific provisions of the maintenance agreement that related to variations. It found that while the contract provided a framework for variations, the State's proposed changes went beyond the scope of permissible alterations. The tribunal held that the State's changes were not in line with the original intent and spirit of the agreement, as they significantly altered the allocation of maintenance responsibilities and costs. Consequently, the tribunal ruled that the State's proposed changes were not permissible variations. The tribunal also determined that the changes were not fair and reasonable, as they would have imposed an undue financial burden on Alstom. The tribunal's decision was based on a detailed analysis of the contract terms and the principles of good faith and fairness in contractual relationships.

The tribunal ordered that the State of Queensland must not proceed with the proposed variations to the maintenance agreement. The tribunal also directed both parties to engage in further negotiations to reach a mutually agreeable resolution regarding the maintenance of the rollingstock. The tribunal's decision underscored the importance of adhering to the terms of the maintenance agreement and the need for any proposed variations to be fair, reasonable, and consistent with the original intent of the contract.

Alstom Transport Australia Pty Ltd

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established