| [2014] FWCA 8217 |
| FAIR WORK COMMISSION |
CORRECTION TO DECISION |
Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement
Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union
(AG2014/8130)
Building, metal and civil construction industries | |
COMMISSIONER BLAIR | MELBOURNE, 20 NOVEMBER 2014 |
Application for approval of the Bendigo Glass & Aluminium Pty Ltd and CFMEU - FFPD Enterprise Agreement 2014-2015.
[1] The decision issued by the Fair Work Commission on 19 November 2014 [2014] FWCA 8217.
By deleting in paragraph [4] the date “26 November 2015” and inserting “26 November 2014” in its place.
Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer
<Price code A, AE411217 PR558022 >
- AGLC
- Application for approval of the Bendigo Glass and Aluminium Pty Ltd and CFMEU - FFPD Enterprise Agreement 2014-2015 [2014] FWCA 8217
- Case
- [2014] FWCA 8217
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The legal issues the court needed to address involved the procedural correctness of the enterprise agreement and the necessity for the amendment to rectify the error. The Commissioner had to determine whether the correction of the date was warranted and if it adhered to the formal requirements set out under the Fair Work Act. The Commissioner considered the implications of the error on the enforceability of the agreement and the necessity of ensuring that the agreement accurately reflected the intentions of the parties involved.
Upon reviewing the application, Commissioner Blair determined that the correction was necessary to ensure the agreement accurately reflected the parties' intentions. The Commissioner found that the typographical error did not change the substantive terms of the agreement but required rectification to prevent potential confusion or misunderstandings. The correction was approved as it aligned with the procedural fairness and the objectives of the Fair Work Act, ensuring the agreement was enforceable and clear. The Commissioner emphasised the importance of accuracy in enterprise agreements to maintain the integrity of the bargaining process.
The final orders included a correction to the decision issued on 19 November 2014, substituting the date "26 November 2015" with "26 November 2014" in paragraph [4]. This ensured the enterprise agreement was correctly documented and reflected the accurate intentions of the parties. The Commissioner's decision was aimed at upholding the integrity and enforceability of the enterprise agreement by rectifying the identified error.
Orders
Orders of the court
Full text does not contain this section.
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.