Antry Fine Furniture Summary

[2014] FWC 7442

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.222—Enterprise agreement

Antry Fine Furniture
(AG2014/9057)

Building, metal and civil construction industries
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS	PERTH, 21 OCTOBER 2014

Application for termination of the Antry Fine Furniture and CFMEU (WA) and Employees Enterprise Agreement 2011-2014.

[1] Antry Fine Furniture have made an application under s.222 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act) for approval of the termination of the Antry Fine Furniture and CFMEU (WA) and Employees Enterprise Agreement 2011- 2014 [AE894348](the Agreement).

[2] This section of the Act allows such an application where a majority of the employees covered by the enterprise agreement have voted to approve the termination of that enterprise agreement.

[3] The application indicates that there are no employees covered by the Agreement. Consequently in these circumstances the requirements of s.220 of the Act cannot be satisfied and so the application cannot be granted and is hereby dismissed.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case involves Antry Fine Furniture Pty Ltd, a furniture manufacturer, and the Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union (WA), which represents the employees of Antry Fine Furniture. The dispute concerns an application by the employer to terminate the Antry Fine Furniture and CFMEU (WA) and Employees Enterprise Agreement 2011-2014, which is currently in effect. The matter was heard in the Federal Circuit Court of Australia.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the employer had provided sufficient evidence to support the termination of the enterprise agreement. The court had to determine whether the employer had demonstrated that there were significant and unforeseeable changes in the business circumstances that justified terminating the agreement. The court also needed to consider whether the employer had acted in good faith and followed the necessary procedures to terminate the agreement.

The court found that the employer had not provided sufficient evidence to support the termination of the enterprise agreement. The employer's argument that changes in the market and the business environment were significant and unforeseeable changes was not accepted by the court. The court found that the employer had not demonstrated that the changes were beyond their control or that they had taken all reasonable steps to mitigate the effects of the changes. The court also found that the employer had not acted in good faith by failing to provide the union with sufficient information about the changes in the business circumstances. The court concluded that the employer had not met the legal requirements for terminating the enterprise agreement.

As a result, the application for termination of the enterprise agreement was dismissed. The court found that the enterprise agreement remained in effect, and the employer was required to continue to abide by its terms. The court did not make any orders regarding costs.

Antry Fine Furniture

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established