Green Pitch Pty Ltd v Brisbane City Football Club Ltd - [2021] QCAT 222

QUEENSLAND CIVIL AND
ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL

CITATION:

Green Pitch Pty Ltd v Brisbane City Football Club Ltd [2021] QCAT 222

PARTIES: GREEN PITCH PTY LTD

(applicant)

v

BRISBANE CITY FOOTBALL CLUB LTD

(respondent)

APPLICATION NO/S:

MCD/O000541-20

MATTER TYPE:

Other minor civil dispute matters

DELIVERED ON:

7 June 2021

HEARING DATE:

2 June 2021

HEARD AT:

Brisbane

DECISION OF:

Adjudicator Lember

ORDERS:

The respondent is to pay the applicant the sum of $15,000 by 31 July 2021.

CATCHWORDS:

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW – ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNALS – QUEENSLAND CIVIL AND ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL – minor civil dispute – claim for debt or liquidated demand of money – whether a coaching contract was terminated or frustrated – whether cancellation of a sporting competition during COVID-19 was a frustrating event

Public Health Act 2005 (Qld) s 362B

Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (Qld), s 3(b), s 13, s 102, Sch 3.

Australian Woollen Mills Pty Ltd v Commonwealth (1955) 93 CLR 546

Bank Line Limited v Arthur Capel & Co [1919] AC 435
Codelfa Constructions Pty Ltd v State Rail Authority of
New South Wales (1982) 149 CLR 337
Davis Contractors Ltd v Fareham Urban District Council [1956] AC 696
Horlock v Beal [1916] 1 AC 486
Metropolitan Water Board v Dick, Kerr & Co [1918] AC 119
National Carriers Ltd v Panalpina (Northern) Ltd [1981] AC 675
Qantas Airways Ltd v Christie (1998) 193 CLR 280
Ringstad v Gollin & Co Pty Ltd (1924) 35 CLR 303
Scanlan’s New Neon Ltd v Tooheys Ltd (1943) 67 CLR 169

Tsakiroglou & Co Ltd v Noblee Thorl GmbH [1962] AC 93

APPEARANCES & REPRESENTATION:

Applicant:

D Cliff, Solicitor, Mills Oakley Lawyers

N Green, Director of the Applicant

Respondent:

C Hardie, Solicitor Just Us Lawyers

R Rossi, President of the Respondent

REASONS FOR DECISION

The applicant, a company operated by Mr Green, was contracted by the respondent, a football club, to supply Mr Green in the head coach role for the club’s 2020 football season.
When the season was suspended on account of the COVID-19 pandemic, the applicant’s contract was brought to an early end by the respondent.
The applicant says its contract was terminated by the respondent in circumstances that entitled the applicant to a termination payment contemplated in clause 10(g) of the contract. The respondent says the contract was automatically terminated by an event of frustration and that no further payments are due to the applicant.
By an application for a minor civil dispute – minor debt filed 12 May 2020 the applicant seeks an order that the respondent pay the applicant the sum of $15,000, being the early termination payment provided for in clause 10(g).
In its response filed 8 June 2020, the respondent club seeks that the application be dismissed.
Each party was, with leave, legally represented at the hearing on 2 June 2021.

Facts the parties agree on

The Contract

In or around August 2019, the parties entered into an undated contract[1] commencing 1 October 2019, the terms of which included, relevantly:
[1]Exhibit…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading Green Pitch Pty Ltd v Brisbane City Football Club Ltd

Details

AGLC: Green Pitch Pty Ltd v Brisbane City Football Club Ltd [2021] QCAT 222
Case: [2021] QCAT 222
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The applicant, Green Pitch Pty Ltd, a company operated by Mr Green, contracted with the respondent, Brisbane City Football Club, to supply Mr Green in the head coach role for the club’s 2020 football season. When the season was suspended due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the applicant’s contract was brought to an early end by the respondent. The applicant claims the contract was terminated by the respondent in circumstances that entitled the applicant to a termination payment under clause 10(g) of the contract. The respondent argues that the contract was automatically terminated by an event of frustration and that no further payments are due to the applicant. The applicant seeks an order that the respondent pay the applicant the sum of $15,000, being the early termination payment provided for in clause 10(g). The respondent argues that the applicant’s claim should be dismissed. The court found that the contract was not frustrated by the suspension of the NPLQ season on 18 March 2020 because the services to be provided by the applicant under the contract were able to be performed and were, in fact, performed - albeit in a modified delivery method - by Mr Green between 18 March 2020 and until 11 May 2020, and then by Mr Smith and Mr Murphy who replaced him the very same day. The court found that the contract was terminated by the respondent under clause 10(g) of the contract, rather than by frustration. The court found in favour of the applicant, with the respondent to pay the applicant the balance owing under the contract pursuant to clause 10(g). The court declined to award costs to the applicant.

Orders