Thiess Pty Ltd v Sheehan

In the case of Thiess Pty Ltd v Sheehan, the applicant sought leave to appeal against a decision of the primary judge concerning the interpretation of an enterprise agreement in relation to project working hours. The primary judge had ruled on a dispute between Thiess, an employer, and Sheehan, an employee, about the hours for which the employee should be paid. The specific issue was whether the project working hours ended when the employee left the crib hut at a particular location where the day’s work took place, or when the employee exited through the access gates to the entire site.

The legal issues the court had to address included the proper construction of the enterprise agreement, specifically clause 16(9), and the principles that should govern such construction. Additionally, the court needed to consider whether there was a basis for the primary judge to recuse themselves due to a prior professional relationship with a party to the proceedings, which could have given rise to an apprehension of bias.

The court held that while the primary judge’s decision had significant implications for the entitlements of a large number of employees, the errors identified in the appeal did not warrant a different outcome. The court found that the primary judge correctly interpreted the enterprise agreement, and there was no basis for the primary judge to recuse themselves as no reasonably apprehended bias was present. Consequently, the application for leave to appeal was granted, but the appeal itself was dismissed with no order as to costs.