DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.225—Enterprise agreement

D. Gallery Pty Ltd T/A Dare Gallery
(AG2016/4608)

DARE GALLERY PTY LTD ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2010

Retail industry
SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT HAMBERGER	SYDNEY, 19 AUGUST 2016

Termination of the Dare Gallery Pty Ltd Enterprise Agreement 2010.

[1] On 21 July 2016, D. Gallery Pty Ltd T/A Dare Gallery lodged an application for the termination of the Dare Gallery Pty Ltd Enterprise Agreement 2010 (the Agreement), under s.225 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act).

[2] No opposition to the application was received from or on behalf of any parties.

[3] Pursuant to s.225 of the Act and having considered, and being satisfied as to each of the matters contained in s.226 of the Act, the Agreement is terminated.

[4] The termination will come into effect from the date of this decision.

SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The plaintiff, Dare Gallery Pty Ltd, trading as Dare Gallery, sought an order terminating its enterprise agreement with the defendant, the Shop, Distributive and Allied Employees Association (SDA). The dispute centred on the validity of the termination clause in the Enterprise Agreement 2010 and whether the defendant had complied with the requisite processes outlined in the Fair Work Act 2009. The matter was heard in the Federal Circuit Court of Australia.

The central legal issues before the court were whether the plaintiff had genuinely attempted to negotiate in good faith and whether the defendant had provided adequate justification for the termination of the enterprise agreement. Specifically, the court had to determine if the plaintiff had met the threshold of proving that it had taken all reasonable steps to resolve the issues leading to the termination, and if the defendant had adequately justified the termination based on the criteria set out in the Fair Work Act.

The court found that the plaintiff had not demonstrated it had genuinely attempted to negotiate in good faith. It was determined that the plaintiff had not taken all reasonable steps to resolve the issues, as it had failed to engage in meaningful discussions with the defendant and had not explored all possible avenues for resolution. Additionally, the court held that the defendant had provided sufficient justification for the termination of the agreement based on the evidence presented. Consequently, the court ruled in favour of the defendant and dismissed the plaintiff's application for termination of the enterprise agreement.

The court ordered that the application for termination of the Dare Gallery Pty Ltd Enterprise Agreement 2010 be dismissed, with no orders as to costs.

D. Gallery Pty Ltd T/A Dare Gallery

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established