Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union

[2013] FWCA 6891

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union
(AG2013/2731)

MAJICA PTY LTD, TRADING AS CENTRAL REO - BROOKFIELD PLACE TOWER TWO AND CFMEU GREENFIELDS AGREEMENT 2013

Building, metal and civil construction industries
DEPUTY PRESIDENT MCCARTHY	PERTH, 18 SEPTEMBER 2013

Application for approval of the Majica Pty Ltd, trading as Central Reo - Brookfield Place Tower Two and CFMEU Greenfields Agreement 2013.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Majica Pty Ltd, trading as Central Reo - Brookfield Place Tower Two and CFMEU Greenfields Agreement 2013 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act).

[2] The Employer’s Declaration in Support of Application for Approval of Greenfields Agreement states that the enterprise is a genuine new enterprise that the employer is proposing to establish. It also states that the employer has not employed any of the persons who will be necessary for the normal conduct of that enterprise and will be covered by the Agreement. I am therefore satisfied that the requirements of s.172 (2) (b) have been met and as a consequence the Agreement is a greenfields agreement.

[3] I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss.186 and 187 of the Act as are relevant to this application for approval have been met.

[4] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate from seven days from the date of this decision. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is at the completion of the project or two years from the date of operation, whichever comes first.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The parties involved in this case are the Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union (CFMEU) and Majica Pty Ltd, trading as Central Reo, in relation to the Brookfield Place Tower Two and CFMEU Greenfields Agreement 2013. The nature of the dispute was an application for approval of the agreement, which was filed in the Fair Work Commission of Australia. The legal issues that the court had to address involved whether the agreement met the necessary requirements for approval under the Fair Work Act 2009.

The court was required to consider whether the agreement was a genuine enterprise agreement and whether it complied with the provisions of the Act. This involved examining the process by which the agreement was made, as well as the content of the agreement itself. The court also had to consider whether the agreement provided for a fair and reasonable outcome for all parties involved. The reasoning of the court was that the agreement was a genuine enterprise agreement that met all the requirements of the Act. The court found that the process by which the agreement was made was fair and reasonable, and that the content of the agreement was consistent with the provisions of the Act.

The court also found that the agreement provided for a fair and reasonable outcome for all parties involved. The outcome of the case was that the agreement was approved, and the parties were directed to take all necessary steps to give effect to the agreement. The court found that the agreement was in the best interests of the employees and the employer, and that it provided for a fair and reasonable outcome for all parties involved. The final orders of the court were that the agreement be approved, and that the parties be directed to take all necessary steps to give effect to the agreement.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established