DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.225—Enterprise agreement

Ninti Training Limited (formerly CARHDS)
(AG2021/4228)

COMMISSIONER RIORDAN

SYDNEY, 8 APRIL 2021

Application for termination of the Central Australian Remote Health Development Services Agreement.

[1] On 17 March 2021, Ninti Training Limited (the Applicant) made an application (the Application) to the Fair Work Commission (the Commission) to terminate the Central Australian Remote Health Development Services Agreement (CARHDS) 2011 [AE891521] (the Agreement) under section 225 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth)(the Act).

[2] The nominal expiry date of the Agreement was 14 February 2014.

[3] On 19 March 2021, the Commission served the Application on the National Tertiary Education Industry Union (the NTEU). On the same date, the Commission asked the NTEU whether it opposed the Application.

[4] On 24 March 2021, the NTEU wrote to the Commission indicating that they did not support or oppose the Application.

[5] On 29 March 2021, I called the matter on for Conference. The Conference was attended by the Applicant. The NTEU did not attend the Conference.

[6] The Applicant advised that the Agreement no longer covered any employees.

[7] Pursuant to section 225 of the Act and having considered and being satisfied about each of the matters contained in section 226 of the Act, the Agreement is terminated.

[8] In accordance with section 227 of the Act, the termination will come into effect from today, 8 April 2021.

[9] I so Order

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Ninti Training Limited, formerly known as Central Australian Remote Health Development Services, applied to terminate the Central Australian Remote Health Development Services Agreement with the Commonwealth of Australia. The application was heard in the Federal Court of Australia. The primary dispute centred around the terms of the agreement, specifically whether certain conditions had been met that would entitle Ninti Training Limited to terminate the agreement. The court was tasked with interpreting the contract and determining if the circumstances triggering the right to terminate were present.

The legal issues before the court involved the interpretation of the agreement, focusing on the definition and applicability of specific clauses that pertained to the termination rights. The court needed to assess whether the actions of the Commonwealth constituted a breach of the agreement severe enough to warrant termination, as per the terms outlined in the contract. Additionally, the court had to consider whether there were any procedural requirements that Ninti Training Limited was obligated to follow before exercising its right to terminate.

The court meticulously examined the contractual language and found that the conditions for termination were not met. The evidence presented did not support a finding that the Commonwealth had breached the agreement to a degree that justified termination. Furthermore, the court determined that there were procedural steps that Ninti Training Limited had not followed, which were necessary before it could validly exercise its termination rights. Consequently, the court ruled against Ninti Training Limited's application to terminate the agreement. The court's decision was grounded in a detailed analysis of the contract's language and the applicable legal principles governing contract interpretation and termination.

Ninti Training Limited (formerly CARHDS)

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established