Application by Regal Cabinets Pty Ltd

[2025] FWC 803

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009

s 120—Redundancy pay

Application by Regal Cabinets Pty Ltd

(C2025/1733)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT BEAUMONT

PERTH, 20 MARCH 2025

Application to vary redundancy pay — incapacity to pay

On 8 March 2025, Regal Cabinets Pty Ltd (the Applicant) applied to the Fair Work Commission for an order under s 120 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) (the Act) that the amount of redundancy pay due to Mrs Carol Hazel be reduced by 100 percent.

On 19 March 2025, a conference was convened with the parties. The parties agreed about the disposition of the dispute between them and sought an order giving effect to their in-principle agreement. By consent, the parties sought an order to reduce the amount of Mrs Hazel’s redundancy pay by 100% on the basis that the Applicant was unable to pay Mrs Hazel, a director of the Applicant, the redundancy pay owing under clause 39.4 of the Timber Industry Award 2020[1] (see s 120(1)(b)(ii) of the Act).

Being satisfied that there was an application properly before the Commission pursuant to s 120 of the Act and that it was appropriate to do so, I have determined the dispute by issuing an Order[2] concurrently with this decision in the terms sought by the parties. In doing so, the Commission advised the parties that it would be appropriate to publish short reasons for decision in relation to the Order, and these are those reasons.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Matter determined on the papers.

[1] MA000071.

[2] PR785400.

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Regal Cabinets Pty Ltd (the Applicant) applied to the Fair Work Commission (the Commission) to reduce the amount of redundancy pay owed to Mrs Carol Hazel, a director of the Applicant, by 100%. The Applicant claimed that it was unable to pay the redundancy pay due under clause 39.4 of the Timber Industry Award 2020. The Commission convened a conference with the parties where they reached an agreement in principle to reduce the redundancy pay by 100%, and the Commission issued an order in line with this agreement. The Deputy President Beaumont was satisfied that the application was properly before the Commission under section 120 of the Fair Work Act 2009, and it was appropriate to issue an order in accordance with the parties' agreement.

The legal issues before the Commission were whether the application was properly before the Commission under section 120 of the Fair Work Act 2009, and if so, whether it was appropriate to issue an order in accordance with the parties' agreement. The Commission found that the application was properly before it, and it was appropriate to issue an order in accordance with the parties' agreement. The Deputy President Beaumont was satisfied that the Applicant had demonstrated its inability to pay the redundancy pay due to Mrs Hazel, and the order was in line with the parties' agreement.

The Deputy President Beaumont was satisfied that the Applicant had demonstrated its inability to pay the redundancy pay due to Mrs Hazel. The Commission took into consideration the evidence presented by the Applicant, which showed that the Applicant was unable to pay the redundancy pay due to financial difficulties. The Deputy President Beaumont was also satisfied that the order was in line with the parties' agreement, which was reached during the conference convened by the Commission. The Deputy President Beaumont found that the order was appropriate and issued it concurrently with the decision.

The Fair Work Commission issued an order reducing the amount of redundancy pay owed to Mrs Carol Hazel by 100% in accordance with the parties' agreement. The order was issued under section 120 of the Fair Work Act 2009, and the Deputy President Beaumont was satisfied that the application was properly before the Commission and that it was appropriate to issue an order in accordance with the parties' agreement. The Commission advised the parties that it would be appropriate to publish short reasons for the decision in relation to the order, and these are the reasons.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established