A consultant who did work for the Canberra Institute of Technology said he was a "relatively humble person" who was encouraged to use language including his company was a "global leader" by executives at the institute.
Patrick Hollingworth gave evidence to the ACT Supreme Court on Monday as part of his company's case against the institute seeking damages for $3.4 million after a contract for nearly $5 million was terminated.
Redrouge Nominees trading as Think Garden has alleged the institute had "repudiated the agreement" and, in doing so, was liable to pay the remaining amount left on the $4.99 million contract.
Mr Hollingworth has previously described himself as a "complexity and systems thinker" but told the court on Monday he was a scientist and the director of Think Garden.
A lawyer for the CIT questioned Mr Hollingworth about language used in tender documentation about being a "global leader" in the field of complied complexity. Mr Hollingworth told the court he was encouraged to use such language by executives at the institute and former CIT board chair Craig Sloan.
"I'm a relatively humble person ... those kind of statements sound very confident but I had been criticised by CIT executives and board chair that we weren't forthcoming enough about where we were at," he said.
Mr Hollingworth said the field was quite small and so he did agree with the statement about being a global leader at the time.
Mr Hollingworth had been engaged by the CIT in a series of contracts spanning a five-year period. The nearly $5 million contract was the largest and was set to run for two years. Think Garden had already been paid nearly $1.7 million on the execution of the contract.
The Think Garden director told the court he expected his work with the CIT would finish at the end of 2021 but said he had a meeting with former chief executive Leanne Cover and Mr Sloan who said they wanted to recommit to the work being undertaken by Mr Hollingworth's company.
Mr Hollingworth told the court Think Garden had written an 18,000-word proposal for the two-year contract which he was incredibly proud of.
The CIT signed the contract with Think Garden in March 2022. The ACT Integrity Commission found Ms Cover had engaged in "serious corrupt conduct" in the awarding of this contract as Skills Minister Chris Steel and the CIT board had been misled. The commission is still investigating the matter but has not made any findings against Mr Hollingworth.
Mr Hollingworth said the contract with the CIT was the largest piece of work being undertaken by Think Garden and the company had prepared for two years worth of work. He had been left "flat footed" after it was cancelled.
'I'm not so sure about a full time job but basically Think Garden had re-commited to CIT for another 24 months and CIT had been our largest and most committed client for a number of years prior to that," Mr Hollingworth said.
"We'd been working quite hard in the lead up to winning that contract."
CIT indefinitely paused the agreement with Think Garden on June 27, 2022. This was days after the ACT Integrity Commission announced it was investigating the matter.
In response, Think Garden informed CIT it "did not agree to the pause indefinitely" and "remained committed to the agreement".
By July 7, Think Garden provided a formal notice to CIT, claiming it was in breach. The alleged breaches included the institute cancelling meetings, placing a pause on the agreement, and "staff not engaging with Think Garden".
Later that month, Think Garden provided notice of termination of agreement, demanding that no later than 4pm on July 28 the institute pay $3.35 million in outstanding money but the CIT paid just over $9100.
Of dispute in the hearing was the clause in the contract allowing for a termination. The clause allows for it to be cancelled in the circumstance of an insolvency or one of both parties are in a material breach of the agreement.
If the contract is terminated, CIT would be liable for only "the contract price, payments and agreed disbursements under this agreement for services rendered before the date of termination".
Think Garden's lawyers have argued this means the CIT is liable to pay the full price of the contract, arguing the contract price was a singular sum even though it was payable in installments. Mr Hollingworth's company has argued it brought intellectual property to the contract and they were liable for this.
Lawyers for the institute say it's only liable for services executed before the termination date.
The hearing continues.
