Construction Forestry Mining & Energy Union v Mammoet Australia Pty Ltd

The dispute in *Construction Forestry Mining & Energy Union v Mammoet Australia Pty Ltd* concerned the interpretation of a clause within a enterprise agreement that provided for the payment of a "site allowance" to employees. The Construction Forestry Mining & Energy Union (CFMMEU) brought proceedings against Mammoet Australia Pty Ltd (Mammoet) in the Federal Court of Australia, alleging that Mammoet had breached the enterprise agreement by failing to pay the site allowance to certain employees. The core of the disagreement lay in whether the specific work performed by these employees qualified them for the allowance under the terms of the agreement.

The Full Federal Court was required to determine whether the site allowance clause in the enterprise agreement applied to employees engaged by Mammoet who were performing work on a specific project. This involved interpreting the language of the clause, particularly the conditions under which the allowance was payable, and assessing whether the factual circumstances of the employees' work satisfied those conditions. The court also had to consider the proper approach to construing enterprise agreements in the context of the *Fair Work Act 2009* (Cth).

Gageler and Keane JJ held that the site allowance was payable to employees who were "engaged on the site" and that the employees in question met this criterion. Their Honours reasoned that the enterprise agreement did not require employees to be directly engaged by Mammoet to be entitled to the allowance, but rather that they be engaged on the site where Mammoet was undertaking its operations. The court applied principles of contractual interpretation, emphasising the importance of giving effect to the plain meaning of the words used in the agreement, and found that the employees' engagement on the site was sufficient to trigger the entitlement to the site allowance, irrespective of their direct employer.

The appeal was allowed, and the matter was remitted to the Federal Court for further consideration of the quantum of the site allowance payable.