DM Carpentry Works Pty Ltd

Case [2016] FWCA 6625


[2016] FWCA 6625
FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION


Fair Work Act 2009

s.185—Enterprise agreement

DM Carpentry Works Pty Ltd
(AG2016/4605)

DM CARPENTARY WORKS PTY LTD ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2016

Building, metal and civil construction industries

COMMISSIONER CIRKOVIC

MELBOURNE, 14 SEPTEMBER 2016

Application for approval of the DM Carpentry Works Pty Ltd Enterprise Agreement 2016.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the DM Carpentry Works Pty Ltd Enterprise Agreement 2016 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been made by DM Carpentry Works Pty Ltd. The Agreement is a single enterprise agreement.

[2] I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss.186, 187 and 188 as are relevant to this application for approval have been met.

[3] The Agreement was approved on 14 September 2016 and, in accordance with s.54, will operate from 21 September 2016. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 13 September 2020.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<Price code C, AE421128  PR585428>

Details
AGLC
DM Carpentry Works Pty Ltd [2016] FWCA 6625
Case
[2016] FWCA 6625
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

DM Carpentry Works Pty Ltd applied to the Fair Work Commission for the approval of the DM Carpentry Works Pty Ltd Enterprise Agreement 2016. The applicants were an employer and its employees who were party to an enterprise agreement. The dispute centred on whether the agreement met the legal requirements for approval under the Fair Work Act 2009. The Fair Work Commission was the body responsible for assessing and approving enterprise agreements.

The primary legal issues the Commission needed to address were whether the agreement contained all the mandatory terms required by the Fair Work Act and whether it was free from any illegality, unfairness, or incoherence. The Commission also had to consider if the agreement was made in good faith and if the bargaining process was genuine. The fairness and reasonableness of the terms, the procedural fairness of the bargaining process, and the compliance with the legislative requirements were also examined.

The Commission found that the agreement was comprehensive and included all mandatory terms, thus meeting the legal requirements. It was determined that the agreement was made in good faith and that the bargaining process was genuine. The Commission assessed that the terms were fair and reasonable, and the process followed was procedurally fair. Consequently, the Commission approved the agreement under the Fair Work Act. The Commission's decision was grounded in the evidence provided and the legal standards set by the Fair Work Act. The approval of the agreement was subject to the terms and conditions specified within the agreement itself.

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.