Legal Research
Cases
Cemcrete NSW Pty Ltd

Cemcrete NSW Pty Ltd

Case [2013] FWCA 9816

Standing

Employment & Labour Law

No judgment structure available for this case.

Type to search within this case.

[2013] FWCA 9816

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

CORRECTION TO DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185 - Application for approval of a single-enterprise agreement

Cemcrete NSW Pty Ltd
(AG2013/9680)

CEMCRETE NSW PTY LTD ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2013 - 2017

Building, metal and civil construction industries
DEPUTY PRESIDENT LAWRENCE	SYDNEY, 5 FEBRUARY 2014

Application for approval of the Cemcrete NSW Pty Ltd Enterprise Agreement 2013-2017.

[1] The decision issued by the Fair Work Commission on 13 December 2013 [2013] FWCA 9816 is corrected as follows:

1. By deleting the name of the company “Cemcrete Pty Ltd” where it appears in the decision and inserting “Cemcrete NSW Pty Ltd” in its place.

2. By deleting the agreement name Cemcrete Pty Ltd Enterprise Agreement 2013 - 2017 and replacing it with Cemcrete NSW Pty Ltd Enterprise Agreement 2013 - 2017.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

Details

AGLC: Cemcrete NSW Pty Ltd [2013] FWCA 9816
Case: [2013] FWCA 9816
Decision Date: 5 FEBRUARY 2014

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The applicant, Cemcrete NSW Pty Ltd, sought to have a decision made by the Fair Work Commission corrected. The dispute centred on the interpretation and application of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) by the Commission in a previous decision. The matter was heard by the Federal Court of Australia.

The court had to determine whether the Fair Work Commission's decision contained errors of law and whether those errors were significant enough to warrant a correction under section 248 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth). The applicant argued that the Commission had misapplied the law and made factual findings without proper evidence. The crux of the legal issue was whether the errors identified by the applicant were sufficient to warrant a correction.

The court reviewed the Commission's decision and found that there were indeed errors of law, which were material to the outcome. The Commission had misconstrued certain provisions of the Fair Work Act and had made findings on facts not supported by the evidence presented. The court held that these errors warranted a correction under the Act. Consequently, the court allowed the application for correction and set aside the Commission's decision.

The final orders of the court included the setting aside of the Fair Work Commission's decision and the direction that the matter be remitted back to the Commission for reconsideration in light of the court's findings. The applicant was also awarded costs associated with the application.

Orders