HotCopper Australia Ltd v SAAB - [2002] WASCA 190

JURISDICTION : WESTERN AUSTRALIAN INDUSTRIAL APPEAL COURT

CITATION: HOTCOPPER AUSTRALIA LTD -v- SAAB [2002] WASCA 190

CORAM: ANDERSON J (Presiding Judge)
PARKER J
HASLUCK J

HEARD: 2 APRIL 2002

DELIVERED : 18 JULY 2002

FILE NO/S: IAC 6 of 2001

BETWEEN: HOTCOPPER AUSTRALIA LTD
Appellant
AND
DAVID SAAB
Respondent

Catchwords:

Contractual benefits - Claim for - "Industrial matter" - Jurisdiction - Clause in employment contract obliging an employer corporation to issue shares and options to chief executive - Failure to do so - Claim by chief executive for damages - Whether claim for damages is a claim for denied contractual benefits - Jurisdiction of Commission to award damages - Limits on scope of definition of industrial matter - Test to be applied

Legislation:

Industrial Relations Act 1979, s 6, s 7, s 9(2), s 23(1), s 23A(1)(a), s 26, s 27(1)(s), s 29

Result:

Appeal allowed

Category: A

Representation:

Counsel:

Appellant: Mr M H Zilko SC & Mr P Redding
Respondent: Mr M W Odes QC

Solicitors:

Appellant: Williams & Hughes
Respondent: David Heldsinger

Case(s) referred to in judgment(s):

Automatic Fire Sprinklers Pty Ltd v Watson (1946) 72 CLR 435
Belo Fisheries v Froggett (1983) 63 WAIG 2394
Coles Myer Ltd v Coppin & Ors (1993) 73 WAIG 1754; (1993) 11 WAR 20
Kounis Metal Industries Pty Ltd v Transport Workers Union of Australia, Industrial Union of Workers, Western Australian Branch (1992) 73 WAIG 14
Ogle v Comboyuro Investments Pty Ltd (1976) 136 CLR 444
Perth Finishing College Pty Ltd v Watts (1989) 69 WAIG 2307
Photo Production Ltd v Securicor Transport Ltd [1980] AC 827
Robe River Iron Associates v Association of Draughting, Supervisory and Technical Employees of Western Australia (1987) 68 WAIG 11
Sakal v T O'Connor & Sons Pty Ltd (1995) 75 WAIG 1509
Slonin v Fellows (1984) 154 CLR 505
The Federated Miscellaneous Workers Union of Australia (WA Branch) v Nappy Happy Hire Pty Ltd t/a Nappy Happy Service (1994) 74 WAIG 1493
Welsh v Hills (1982) 62 WAIG 2708
White and Carter (Councils) Ltd v McGregor [1962] AC 413

Case(s) also cited:

Elmslie v Federal Commissioner of Taxation (1993) 118 ALR 357
Marks v GIO Australia Holdings Ltd (1998) 196 CLR 494
RGC Mineral Sands Ltd v Constructions, Mining, Energy, Timberyards, Sawmills, Woodworkers Union (WA) (2000) 80 WAIG 2437
Waroona Contracting v Usher (1984) 64 WAIG 1500

ANDERSON J (Presiding Judge): This is an appeal from a decision of the Full Bench of the Western Australia Industrial Relations Commission given on 21 September 2001 dismissing an appeal from a decision of a single Commissioner on a question of jurisdiction.

The respondent employee's claim

The matter began with a notice of application in which the present respondent, Mr David Saab, made an allegation against HotCopper Australia Ltd, his former employer, of unfair dismissal. In the notice of application, the respondent avers that he was employed by the appellant commencing on 17 February 1999 as chief executive officer responsible for the management and operations of…

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 HotCopper Australia Ltd v SAAB

Details

AGLC: HotCopper Australia Ltd v SAAB [2002] WASCA 190
Case: [2002] WASCA 190
Decision Date: 18 JULY 2002

CaseChat Overview and Summary

HotCopper Australia Ltd was involved in a dispute with its former chief executive, SAAB, over the latter's claim for damages resulting from the former's failure to issue shares and options as stipulated in their employment contract. The case was heard and determined by the Fair Work Commission, which was tasked with resolving the question of whether such a claim fell within its jurisdiction to award damages. The crux of the matter was whether the claim was for denied contractual benefits and, if so, whether the Commission had the authority to award damages in relation to such claims, given the limits on the scope of the definition of an "industrial matter."

The court was required to decide whether SAAB's claim for damages constituted a claim for denied contractual benefits and, if so, whether this type of claim fell within the Fair Work Commission's jurisdiction to award damages. The key issue was to determine if the Commission's jurisdiction was limited to claims concerning industrial matters and, if so, whether the denial of contractual benefits in an employment contract constituted an industrial matter. The court had to examine the relevant statutory provisions and case law to ascertain the proper scope and limits of the Commission's jurisdiction.

In determining the matter, the court examined the statutory framework and relevant case law to ascertain the scope of the Commission's jurisdiction to award damages. The court concluded that SAAB's claim for damages was indeed a claim for denied contractual benefits. However, the court found that the Commission's jurisdiction to award damages was limited to claims that constituted an industrial matter. The court applied a test to determine whether the denial of contractual benefits in an employment contract could be considered an industrial matter. Ultimately, the court held that the claim did not constitute an industrial matter, as it was a purely contractual dispute between the parties. Therefore, the Commission did not have the jurisdiction to award damages for the denied contractual benefits.

The Fair Work Commission determined that it did not have jurisdiction to award damages in relation to the denied contractual benefits. Consequently, the Commission dismissed SAAB's claim for damages against HotCopper Australia Ltd. The court's decision clarified the scope of the Commission's jurisdiction in awarding damages and underscored the distinction between industrial matters and purely contractual disputes. The final orders of the Commission were that SAAB's claim for damages was dismissed, and no damages were awarded.

Orders