Chippington v Sterling Software (Pacific) Pty Ltd & anor [2001] NSWIRComm 17

Chippington v Sterling Software (Pacific) Pty Ltd & anor [2001] NSWIRComm 17

The contract of employment and collateral arrangements were unfair to the extent that they failed to include an amount reflective of the applicant's salary package and commission in calculating 24.67 weeks' termination pay, where a significant proportion of his remuneration was commission, superannuation and motor vehicle subsidy formed part of his ordinary remuneration package, and the retrenchment resulted from a company acquisition. The 24.67 week calculation period itself was modest but within the appropriate range.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
07 March 2001
Procedural Posture
Application Under S.106 of the Industrial Relations Act 1996 / Judgment
Outcome
Application allowed in part; the contract of employment and collateral arrangements were to be varied to rectify the unfairness, with a monetary order and interest to be made for the outstanding sum.
Legal Topics
['contract of Employment' 'retrenchment' 'redundancy Pay' 'termination Pay' 'notice of Termination' 'commission' 'superannuation' 'motor Vehicle Allowance']
['industrial Relations' 'employment Law'] ['contract of Employment' 'retrenchment' 'redundancy Pay' 'termination Pay' 'notice of Termination' 'commission' 'superannuation' 'motor Vehicle Allowance']

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 S.106 of the Industrial Relations Act 1996 / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the level of severance or redundancy payment offered to the applicant was unfair in the circumstances.' 'Whether commission, superannuation and motor vehicle subsidy should have been included in calculating termination pay.' 'Whether the period of 24.67 weeks used to calculate the termination payment was unfair.']

Ratio Decidendi

The contract of employment and collateral arrangements were unfair to the extent that they failed to include an amount reflective of the applicant's salary package and commission in calculating 24.67 weeks' termination pay, where a significant proportion of his remuneration was commission, superannuation and motor vehicle subsidy formed part of his ordinary remuneration package, and the retrenchment resulted from a company acquisition. The 24.67 week calculation period itself was modest but within the appropriate range.

Court Disposition

Application allowed in part; the contract of employment and collateral arrangements were to be varied to rectify the unfairness, with a monetary order and interest to be made for the outstanding sum.

Orders

  • ['The terms of the contract of employment and collateral arrangements are to be varied to the extent necessary to rectify the unfairness identified in the judgment.' 'A monetary order is to be made in the amount of the resultant outstanding sum.' 'Interest is to be awarded upon that sum at the Supreme Court scale...