Cunningham v Midcoast Petroleum [2001] NSWIRComm 66

Cunningham v Midcoast Petroleum [2001] NSWIRComm 66

Midcoast Petroleum Pty Ltd terminated Mr Cunningham before the expiry of his fixed-term employment because it considered that his 2000 lubricant sales targets would not be achieved. The sales target was arbitrary, the respondent's assessment went no further than sales against target, the Position Description was broader than lubricant sales targets, and the performance agreement was not validly linked to the contract. It was therefore not open to rely on the performance agreement or clause 9.1.3 to terminate on the grounds advanced, and the termination was harsh, unreasonable and unjust.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
04 April 2001
Procedural Posture
Application Re Unfair Dismissal Pursuant to Section 84 of the Industrial Relations Act 1996 / Decision After Arbitration Hearing
Outcome
Application upheld; termination found harsh, unreasonable and unjust; reinstatement and re-employment found impractical; compensation awarded at the maximum jurisdictional limit.
Legal Topics
['unfair Dismissal' 'fixed Term Contract of Employment' 'termination for Performance' 'sales Targets' 'compensation']
['industrial Relations' 'employment Law'] ['unfair Dismissal' 'fixed Term Contract of Employment' 'termination for Performance' 'sales Targets' 'compensation']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Application Re Unfair Dismissal Pursuant to Section 84 of the Industrial Relations Act 1996 / Decision After Arbitration Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether Mr Cunningham was an employee of Midcoast Petroleum Pty Ltd.' 'Whether Midcoast Petroleum Pty Ltd could rely on clause 9.1.3 of the employment contract to terminate Mr Cunningham before the fixed-term expiry date for failure to meet lubricant sales targets.' 'Whether the performance agreement formed part of, or was validly linked to, the contract of employment.' 'Whether the termination was harsh, unreasonable and unjust.' 'Whether reinstatement, re-employment or compensation was the appropriate remedy.']

Ratio Decidendi

Midcoast Petroleum Pty Ltd terminated Mr Cunningham before the expiry of his fixed-term employment because it considered that his 2000 lubricant sales targets would not be achieved. The sales target was arbitrary, the respondent's assessment went no further than sales against target, the Position Description was broader than lubricant sales targets, and the performance agreement was not validly linked to the contract. It was therefore not open to rely on the performance agreement or clause 9.1.3 to terminate on the grounds advanced, and the termination was harsh, unreasonable and unjust.

Court Disposition

Application upheld; termination found harsh, unreasonable and unjust; reinstatement and re-employment found impractical; compensation awarded at the maximum jurisdictional limit.

Orders

  • ['Pursuant to section 89 of the Industrial Relations Act 1996 Midcoast Petroleum Pty Ltd is ordered to pay Mr James George Cunningham the sum of $21,499.92 within 21 days of the date of this decision.']