Shane Mitchell-Calvert v Yahoo! Inc [2001] NSWIRComm 136

Shane Mitchell-Calvert v Yahoo! Inc [2001] NSWIRComm 136

The Industrial Relations Commission found it had jurisdiction under s106 as the applicant's remuneration (including share options) exceeded the threshold under s83, and the application was a genuine attack on the contract, not merely an unfair dismissal claim. The contract was found unfair due to the arbitrary, unachievable sales targets, the unfair process and pressure surrounding termination (constituting a constructive dismissal), and the uncertainty and unfairness in the notice provision. The contract was accordingly varied to provide two months' notice, with associated compensation including option entitlements and salary, with interest and costs.

Parties
Applicant: Shane Mitchell-Calvert; Respondent: Yahoo! Inc
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
22 June 2001
Procedural Posture
Application Under S106 Industrial Relations Act 1996 / Judgment
Outcome
Contract varied for unfairness—orders made for compensation, variation of notice term, variation of option plan, and payment of interest and costs.
Legal Topics
Unfair Contracts, Remuneration Calculation, Constructive Dismissal, Termination Notice, Share Options, Jurisdiction Under S106
Industrial Relations Employment Law Unfair Contracts Remuneration Calculation Constructive Dismissal Termination Notice Share Options Jurisdiction Under S106

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 5 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Shane Mitchell-Calvert

Applicant

Yahoo! Inc

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application Under S106 Industrial Relations Act 1996 / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the employment contract was unfair in its terms and/or performance under s106 of the Industrial Relations Act 1996
  2. 2 Whether jurisdiction was available under s106 or excluded by s109A and Part 6 (unfair dismissal) of the Act
  3. 3 Whether annual remuneration includes the share option plan under s83

Ratio Decidendi

The Industrial Relations Commission found it had jurisdiction under s106 as the applicant's remuneration (including share options) exceeded the threshold under s83, and the application was a genuine attack on the contract, not merely an unfair dismissal claim. The contract was found unfair due to the arbitrary, unachievable sales targets, the unfair process and pressure surrounding termination (constituting a constructive dismissal), and the uncertainty and unfairness in the notice provision. The contract was accordingly varied to provide two months' notice, with associated compensation including option entitlements and salary, with interest and costs.

Court Disposition

Contract varied for unfairness—orders made for compensation, variation of notice term, variation of option plan, and payment of interest and costs.

Orders

  • The employment contract is varied from 20 December 1998 to require Yahoo! Inc to give the applicant two months' notice upon termination.
  • The Option Scheme is varied to provide, upon termination by Yahoo! Inc, the applicant may exercise the proportion of his options reflecting the period of operation during the notice period.