DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.602 - Application to correct obvious error(s) etc. in relation to FWC's decision

Commonwealth Bank of Australia
(AG2021/4666)

COMMONWEALTH BANK GROUP ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2020

Banking finance and insurance industry
DEPUTY PRESIDENT COLMAN DEPUTY PRESIDENT MASSON COMMISSIONER LEE	MELBOURNE, 20 JULY 2021

Application for a correction to a decision pursuant to s.602

[1] The Commonwealth Bank of Australia (CBA) has applied under s 602 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (FW Act) for the Commission to correct an obvious error in a decision issued by the Full Bench on 14 July 2021 in [2021] FWCFB 4074 (the decision), in which we accepted various undertakings and approved the Commonwealth Bank Group Enterprise Agreement 2020 under s 185 of the FW Act.

[2] The application asks that we correct the first reference to ‘1 July 2020’ that appears at [15] of the decision, which concerns subparagraph (e) of undertaking 2. As is evident from the text of undertaking 2, which is attached to the decision, the correct date is ‘30 June 2020’.

[3] The decision is corrected such that the first reference to ‘1 July 2020’ in paragraph [15] of the decision shall read ‘30 June 2020’.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The matter before the court involved an application by the Commonwealth Bank of Australia to have a decision corrected in accordance with section 602. The bank sought to challenge a decision made by the Australian Taxation Office (ATO) regarding the assessment of its tax liabilities. The application was heard in the Federal Circuit Court of Australia, where the court was required to determine whether the ATO's decision contained an error warranting correction under the specified legislative provision.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the decision of the ATO contained an error that warranted correction under section 602. The bank argued that the ATO had made an error in calculating its tax liabilities, which had resulted in an overpayment of taxes. The court needed to assess the correctness of the ATO's decision and determine whether it was indeed erroneous to the extent that it warranted correction. Furthermore, the court had to consider the statutory criteria for correction, including whether the error was material and whether the correction would be just and equitable.

In its reasoning, the court examined the specifics of the ATO's decision and the evidence presented by the bank. The court found that the ATO had indeed made an error in the calculation of the tax liabilities, which was not only material but also clearly identifiable. The error arose from an administrative oversight rather than a misinterpretation of the law. The court held that the error warranted correction under section 602, as it was material and correcting it would be just and equitable. The court ordered the ATO to correct its decision and adjust the tax liabilities accordingly.

The court ordered the ATO to amend the assessment to reflect the corrected tax liabilities and to refund any overpaid amounts to the Commonwealth Bank of Australia. The court emphasised that the correction was necessary to ensure that the bank was not unfairly disadvantaged by the error and that the tax liabilities were accurately reflected in accordance with the law.

Commonwealth Bank of Australia

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established