Sheffield v Brambles Australia Limited and another [2002] NSWIRComm 3

Sheffield v Brambles Australia Limited and another [2002] NSWIRComm 3

The contract of employment, as performed, was unfair in that the applicant, after twelve years of managerial service, was left with only the minimal contractual benefits due to the parties' failure to agree to a reasonable period of notice and full remuneration, rather than what would be fair and reasonable in the circumstances. The operation of the share option plan and the exercise of the board's discretion was similarly unfair. Accordingly, the contract and associated option plan should be varied to afford the applicant a reasonable remedy, subject to further submissions as to appropriate quantum.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
18 January 2002
Procedural Posture
Application Under S106 of the Industrial Relations Act 1996 / Judgment on Liability and Fairness, Orders to Await Further Submissions
Outcome
Finding of unfairness under s106; particulars of remedy to be determined after further submissions.
Legal Topics
['unfair Contract' 'notice of Termination' 'share Options' 'superannuation' 'relocation Expenses']
['industrial Relations' 'employment Law'] ['unfair Contract' 'notice of Termination' 'share Options' 'superannuation' 'relocation Expenses']

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 Under S106 of the Industrial Relations Act 1996 / Judgment on Liability and Fairness, Orders to Await Further Submissions

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the contract of employment and collateral share option arrangements were unfair within the meaning of s106 of the Industrial Relations Act 1996' 'Whether the six-month notice provision and payment at base salary only was unfair' 'Whether the refusal to exercise director discretion on share options was unfair' 'Appropriate remedy for unfairness, if established']

Ratio Decidendi

The contract of employment, as performed, was unfair in that the applicant, after twelve years of managerial service, was left with only the minimal contractual benefits due to the parties' failure to agree to a reasonable period of notice and full remuneration, rather than what would be fair and reasonable in the circumstances. The operation of the share option plan and the exercise of the board's discretion was similarly unfair. Accordingly, the contract and associated option plan should be varied to afford the applicant a reasonable remedy, subject to further submissions as to appropriate quantum.

Court Disposition

Finding of unfairness under s106; particulars of remedy to be determined after further submissions.

Orders

  • ['Contract and collateral arrangements to be varied to reflect 12 months’ notice at a level exceeding base rate and to include certain relocation and superannuation benefits, and varied treatment of share options, subject to further submissions from the parties.' 'Quantum of orders and costs to be determined at a...