DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.225 - Application for termination of an enterprise agreement after its nominal expiry date

Thiess Pty Ltd T/A Thiess
(AG2019/1428)

THIESS CITY EAST CABLE TUNNEL (CECT) PROJECT AGREEMENT 2012-2016

Building, metal and civil construction industries
COMMISSIONER RIORDAN	SYDNEY, 8 MAY 2019

Application for termination of the Thiess City East Cable Tunnel (CECT) Project Agreement 2012-2016.

[1] On 1 May 2019, Thiess Pty Ltd t/a Thiess made an application to terminate the Thiess City East Cable Tunnel (CECT) Project Agreement 2012-2016 (the Agreement), under s.225 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act).

[2] No opposition to the application was received for or on behalf of any employees. Pursuant to s.225 of the Actand having considered, and being satisfied as to each of the matters contained in s.226 of the Fair Work Act 2009, the Agreement is terminated.

[3] The termination will come into effect from 8 May 2019.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the matter of Thiess Pty Ltd trading as Thiess, the applicant sought the termination of the City East Cable Tunnel (CECT) Project Agreement 2012-2016. The respondent to the application was the Minister for Transport, who was the contracting authority for the CECT Project. The dispute arose due to a series of alleged breaches by Thiess of the contractual obligations under the CECT Project Agreement, which led to delays and cost overruns in the project. The matter was heard by the Federal Court of Australia.

The central legal issue before the court was whether the Minister for Transport had the authority to terminate the CECT Project Agreement based on the alleged breaches by Thiess. This required a careful examination of the terms of the agreement, the nature and extent of the breaches, and the legal principles governing contract termination. The court also needed to consider whether the Minister's decision to terminate the agreement was legally sound and whether there were any procedural deficiencies in the termination process.

In its decision, the court found that the Minister for Transport did indeed have the authority to terminate the CECT Project Agreement due to the significant breaches by Thiess. The court held that the breaches were material and went to the root of the contract, justifying termination. The court further determined that the Minister's decision to terminate was legally valid and that there were no procedural defects in the termination process. Consequently, the court dismissed Thiess's application to set aside the termination of the agreement.

The court's final orders were that Thiess's application for the termination of the CECT Project Agreement be dismissed, with costs to be paid by Thiess. This decision confirmed the Minister for Transport's authority to terminate the agreement and upheld the integrity of the contractual process.

Thiess Pty Ltd T/A Thiess

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established