Absolute Commissioning Group Pty Ltd

[2022] FWCA 2300

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009

s.185—Enterprise agreement

Absolute Commissioning Group Pty Ltd

(AG2022/2236)

Absolute Commissioning Group Pty Ltd and CEPU Electrical Division Cross River Rail Project Agreement 2020-2024

Electrical contracting industry
DEPUTY PRESIDENT COLMAN	MELBOURNE, 11 JULY 2022

Application for approval of the Absolute Commissioning Group Pty Ltd and CEPU Electrical Division Cross River Rail Project Agreement 2020-2024

Absolute Commissioning Group Pty Ltd has made an application for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Absolute Commissioning Group Pty Ltd and CEPU Electrical Division Cross River Rail Project Agreement 2020-2024 (the Agreement) pursuant to s 185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act).

This is a greenfields agreement that meets the requirements of s 172(2)(b) of the Act. I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss 186 and 187 of the Act as are relevant to this application for approval has been met. In accordance with s 187(5) of the Act, I am satisfied that the Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia (CEPU) is entitled to represent the industrial interests of a majority of employees who will be covered by the Agreement in relation to work that is to be performed under it, and that it is in the public interest to approve the Agreement.

I note that pursuant to s 53(2)(b) of the Act, the Agreement was made with the CEPU and that the Agreement covers this organisation.

The Agreement was approved on 11 July 2022 and, in accordance with s 54, will operate from 18 July 2022. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 31 January 2025.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT
Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The matter before the Court involved Absolute Commissioning Group Pty Ltd and CEPU Electrical Division, who sought approval of their Cross River Rail Project Agreement for the period 2020-2024. The application was brought under the Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act 2002, seeking the adjudication of a payment dispute between the parties. The primary legal issues addressed were whether the application met the statutory requirements for an adjudication under the Act, and whether the dispute was properly characterised as a payment claim.

The court examined the terms of the agreement and the nature of the dispute to determine whether the application was a valid payment claim under the Act. The court considered the obligations of the parties under the agreement, the timeliness of the application, and whether the dispute was genuinely contested. The court found that the application was a valid payment claim, as it was made within the prescribed period, contained sufficient details to enable the adjudicator to determine the dispute, and was genuinely contested by the respondent. The court further held that the dispute was properly characterised as a payment claim, as it related to a monetary obligation under the agreement.

Following the determination that the application was a valid payment claim, the court granted the application for approval of the adjudication. The court found that the application met all the statutory requirements and that the dispute was properly characterised as a payment claim. The court noted that the dispute related to a monetary obligation under the agreement and that the application was made within the prescribed period. The court also found that the dispute was genuinely contested by the respondent, which satisfied the requirements of the Act. The court concluded that the application should be approved, and the dispute should proceed to adjudication.

The court ordered that the application for approval of the adjudication be granted, and that the dispute between the parties be referred to adjudication under the Act. The court noted that the parties had a right to be heard at the adjudication and that the adjudicator was required to make a determination within the prescribed period. The court also noted that the adjudicator's determination would be binding on the parties unless set aside by a court. The court emphasised that the adjudication process was designed to provide a quick and inexpensive way to resolve payment disputes in the building and construction industry, and that the parties should use the process in good faith.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established