Corporate law Brisbane

What are Teaming Agreements?

HomePrivate: BlogCommercial lawCorporate lawWhat are Teaming Agreements?

by

reviewed by

Malcolm Burrows

Reading Time:

3–4 minutes

A teaming agreement (Teaming Agreement) is a contract between two or more parties (Team Members) that is used to regulate the rights and obligations where one of them pursues a tender or contract with a with a third party (Prime Contract).  Once the Prime Contract is entered into between the third party and Team Member # 1, a sub-contract is executed between Team Member # 1 and the other Team Member(s) to enable Team Member # 1 to discharge its obligations under the Prime Contract. 

The benefits of Teaming Agreements are that they allow parties to pool resources for a limited purpose (Permitted Purpose), without necessarily requiring the establishment of a joint venture entity – however, the Team Members could do this if they wanted to.

Common clauses in Teaming Agreements

A Teaming Agreement is flexible depending on the resources of the Team Members and the contract they hope to pursue, however, common clauses include:

  • confidentiality – neither Team Member may disclose the confidential information of the other;
  • dispute resolution – which jurisdiction’s laws govern the agreement and are there are any mandatory pre-filing dispute resolution practices, such as mediation or arbitration;
  • intellectual property – who owns the intellectual property created during the term of the Agreement, and is any intellectual property assigned or licenced from one Team Member to the other;
  • liability – neither Team Member is liable to the other in respect of any loss or damage suffered or incurred in respect of goods or services supplied pursuant to this Agreement, except to the extent that the loss or damage is caused by resources contributed by one Team Member infringing any intellectual property rights;
  • leadership – who controls the contracting process and how is communication to be regulated;
  • management – a group of representatives from each Team Member (Teaming Committee) usually meets regularly to manage the pursuit of the contractor;
  • non-circumvention – neither Party should submit or participate in independent proposals to the third party and both parties should act in good faith when discharging their obligations under the Agreement;
  • parties – the relationship between the parties is that of prime contractor and subcontractor, not that of principal and agent;
  • resource contributions – what property, human resources and financial resources are the Team Members required to provide in order to tender for the Prime Contract, and does the other Team Member have a licence to use these resources; and
  • termination – what events trigger a right to termination and how much notice (if any) is required.

Common issues with Teaming Agreements

One limitation with Teaming Agreements is that they need to be renegotiated for every new Prime Contract.  There is also the risk that one Team Member will go around or circumvent the other Team Member in order to contract directly with the third party, or that one Team Member will solicit clients or employees from the other.  This is why clear non-circumvention clauses are important elements of Teaming Agreements.

Links and further references

Cases

BNWP Enterprises Pty Ltd v Unisys Australia Ltd [1997] FCA 1– in this case the parties’ tender on the Prime Contract was successful but they were unable to conclude negotiations on a Sub-contract.  The Federal Court held that the Teaming Agreement was a contract for a joint bid, therefore the Prime Contract was subject to the parties entering into a binding Sub-contract.

Awards

Lawyer Monthly Legal Awards 2016 - Winner Joint Ventures Law Firm of the Year

Further information about Teaming Agreements and Joint Ventures

If you need assistance preparing a Teaming Agreement or a Joint Venture, please telephone me for an obligation free and confidential discussion.


Related insights about Teaming Agreements and Joint Ventures

  • Director’s identification numbers to become a reality

    Director’s identification numbers to become a reality

    On 12 June 2020, the Treasury Laws Amendment (Registries Modernisation and Other Measures) Act 2020 introduced the requirement for all Australian company directors to have a “Director Identification Number” (DIN).  The DIN will become a single identifier for each director across all of their office holdings with the true identity of each director is verified…

    Read more …

  • What exactly is a section 293 direction?

    What exactly is a section 293 direction?

    There are several reasons why a shareholder may require financial information, primarily they are denied access to the ‘accounts’ so as to make informed decision about the company.  The Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) (Act) provides various mechanisms for shareholders to obtain financial and accounting information about a company, to allow them to access full and…

    Read more …

  • Director’s misuse of funds held to be oppressive

    Director’s misuse of funds held to be oppressive

    This article explores shareholder oppression, examining Section 232 of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) and Martin v Australian Squash Club Pty Ltd (1996) 14 ACLC 452, to understand the cumulative effect of individual acts.

    Read more …

  • What are sophisticated investors?

    What are sophisticated investors?

    This article provides an overview of the requirements for a person to be a sophisticated investor under the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) and the Corporations Regulations 2001 (Cth). It covers the definition of ‘person’, the Assets Test and Income Test, Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) guidance, and the complexities of self-managed super funds.

    Read more …

  • e-Signatures – legally binding on companies?

    e-Signatures – legally binding on companies?

    E-signatures are becoming increasingly popular, but are they legally binding? Find out in this article, which examines the Adelaide Bank case and reveals the limitations of e-signatures when it comes to executing a deed. Click through to learn more.

    Read more …

  • Company funds must be used for company purposes

    Company funds must be used for company purposes

    This article examines the legal principles behind when it is permissible to use company funds, focusing on the case of Re D G Brims and Sons Pty Ltd (1995) 16 ASCR 559, which established that company funds must only be used for company purposes and not to pay for legal costs of proceedings for the…

    Read more …

  • The running account defence to unfair preference claims

    The running account defence to unfair preference claims

    Creditors who have been paid by a customer on credit may find themselves facing an Unfair Preference claim letter from a liquidator. Learn more about the defences available to creditors and how to protect yourself from repaying more than your fair share.

    Read more …

  • Unfair preferences & the set-off defence

    Unfair preferences & the set-off defence

    Under section 588FA of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) (Act) an unfair preference is defined as a transaction, such as payment of an outstanding debt, between a company and an unsecured creditor which results in that unsecured creditor receiving more than it would have received if it had to prove in the winding up of the…

    Read more …

  • Unfair preferences – the Doctrine of Ultimate Effect

    Unfair preferences – the Doctrine of Ultimate Effect

    Explore the Doctrine of Ultimate Effect, running account defence and more in this article by Dundas Lawyers. Learn how these concepts can provide a defence to an unfair preference claim under Section 588FA of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth).

    Read more …


Posted

in

,
Send this to a friend