Australian Licensed Aircraft Engineers Association v International Aviation Service Assistance Pty Ltd (No.2)

The case of Australian Licensed Aircraft Engineers Association v International Aviation Service Assistance Pty Ltd (No.2) involved the Australian Licensed Aircraft Engineers Association and International Aviation Service Assistance Pty Ltd, with the dispute centred on the Independent Contractors Act 2006 (Cth). The applicants sought to amend orders that had been previously made to alter the terms of contracts and to plead a breach of those altered terms. The legal issues that the court was required to decide involved the interpretation of sections 12(3), 16(2), and 16(4) of the Independent Contractors Act 2006 (Cth) in relation to the retrospective variation of contracts and the power of the court to amend its orders.

The court found that section 16(4) of the Act, which states that an order takes effect on the date of the order or a later date specified in the order, clearly indicated that the court did not have the authority to make orders with retrospective effect. The court considered the history of the relevant provisions, including their origins in the Industrial Relations Act 1988 (Cth) and their subsequent re-enactment in the Independent Contractors Act 2006 (Cth). The court concluded that the plain meaning of section 16(4) precluded the making of retrospective orders and that such orders were not permitted by the Act. Consequently, the court declined to amend the orders to give them retrospective effect or to allow the pleadings to be amended to assert a breach of the varied terms on the basis of conduct occurring before the orders were made.

In dismissing the application to amend the orders, the court held that the orders made on 29 March 2011 were not retrospective in their operation and that the court should not exercise its power to amend the orders where it lacked the authority to make the order sought. The court also noted that the second amendment application to add prayer 3A was premised on the assumption that certain clauses would have been in effect retrospectively, which the court had already determined was not possible. The applicants' amended notice of motion dated 10 June 2011 was dismissed with costs.

The final orders were that the applicants' amended notice of motion dated 10 June 2011 be dismissed with costs, and entry of orders was to be dealt with in accordance with Rule 39.32 of the Federal Court Rules 2011.