Hockey v WIN Corporation Pty Ltd

In the Federal Court of Australia, the case of Hockey v WIN Corporation Pty Ltd involved a dispute between Mr Hockey and WIN Corporation over the terms of Mr Hockey’s employment contract. The primary issue was the interpretation of clause (a)(ii) in the addendum to the employment contract dated 29 March 2011. The court was tasked with determining whether this clause meant that Mr Hockey would be paid the balance of his employment term until 3 September 2013. Additionally, the court examined whether any part of the contract was contrary to the Taxation Administration Act 1953 (Cth), and if so, what the consequences of such illegality would be. The court also considered if the allegedly illegal provision was severable from the rest of the contract. Finally, the court assessed whether WIN engaged in conduct that misled Mr Hockey regarding his employment.

The court concluded that clause (a)(ii) unambiguously indicated that Mr Hockey would be paid for the balance of his term until 3 September 2013. The court found it unnecessary to address the illegality and severability issues due to its interpretation of the clause. However, it indicated that if the clause was indeed contrary to the Taxation Administration Act, the contract would not be rendered invalid or unenforceable. The court also noted that if the contract was deemed invalid or unenforceable, the words “as a redundancy” would not be severable. Importantly, the court found that WIN did not engage in any misleading conduct towards Mr Hockey.

The court ordered that the parties should confer to determine the quantum of damages to which Mr Hockey was entitled, including any netting-off and interest. If they could not agree, the matter would be relisted for a hearing. The court provisionally indicated that costs should follow the event, meaning that WIN would pay Mr Hockey’s costs unless otherwise argued.