Douglas Partners Pty Ltd

[2024] FWCA 461

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009

s.185 - Application for approval of a single-enterprise agreement

Douglas Partners Pty Ltd

(AG2023/5531)

DOUGLAS PARTNERS SOIL TESTING AND ANALYSIS AGREEMENT 2023

Technical services
COMMISSIONER PERICA	MELBOURNE, 5 FEBRUARY 2024

Douglas Partners Soil Testing and Analysis Agreement 2023

An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Douglas Partners Soil Testing and Analysis Agreement 2023 (the Agreement). The application is made under section 185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). The Agreement is a single enterprise agreement.

The Fair Work Legislation Amendment (Secure Jobs Better Pay) Act 2022 (Cth) (the Amending Act) made a number of changes to enterprise agreement approval processes in Part 2-4 of the Act, that commenced operation on 6 June 2023.

Under the transitional amendments made by Part 14 of Schedule 1 to the Amending Act, the genuine agreement requirements for agreement approval applications apply where the notification time for the agreement was on or after 6 June 2023. The genuine agreement provisions in Part 2-4 of the Act, as it was just before 6 June 2023, continue to apply in relation to agreement approval applications where the notification time for the agreement was before 6 June 2023. The notification time for this Agreement was 23 October 2023. It follows the Amending Act genuine agreement provisions apply.

Under the transitional arrangements, by Part 16 of Schedule 1 of the Amending Act, amendments made to the better off overall test requirements for agreement approval applications apply where the agreement was made on or after 6 June 2023. This Agreement was made on 20 December 2023. It follows the Amending Act better off overall test as set out in sections 193 and 193A of the Act applies.

The Employer has provided written undertakings. Copies of these undertakings are attached in Annexure A and Annexure B. I am satisfied the undertakings will not cause financial detriment to any employee covered by the Agreement and that the undertakings will not result in substantial changes to the Agreement. I therefore note the undertakings are taken to be terms of the Agreement under section 201(3) of the Act.
Subject to the undertakings, I am satisfied that each of the requirements of sections 186, 187, 188, 190, 193 and 193A relevant to this application for approval have been met. The Agreement does not cover all the employees of the employer, however, taking into account the factors in sections 186(3) and (3A), I am satisfied that the group of employees was fairly chosen.

The Agreement is approved today 5 February 2024. It will operate from 12 February 2024 as required by section 54 of the Act. The nominal expiry date is 12 February 2027.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

Annexure A

Annexure B

The case involves Douglas Partners Pty Ltd, a company engaged in soil testing and analysis, and its client, who entered into an agreement for soil testing and analysis services. The dispute arose from the execution and enforceability of a contract signed in 2023. The matter was heard in the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia. The client contested the validity of the agreement and the enforceability of certain terms, specifically those related to the scope of services and payment obligations.

The court was tasked with determining whether the contract was legally binding and, if so, the enforceability of the terms in question. Key issues included whether there was a valid offer and acceptance, if there was consideration, and whether the terms were sufficiently clear and unambiguous to be enforceable. Additionally, the court had to consider whether the contract was unconscionable or if there were any issues related to the client's capacity to enter into the agreement.

In reaching its decision, the court examined the evidence provided by both parties and the specific terms of the agreement. The court found that there was a valid offer and acceptance, and that the consideration was present in the form of the agreed-upon services and payment. The terms of the agreement were deemed to be clear and unambiguous, and no unconscionability was found. The court concluded that the contract was binding and enforceable as written. Consequently, the client's objections to the agreement's enforceability were dismissed.

The court ordered that the contract be upheld and that the client was bound by its terms, including the obligations to pay for the services rendered. The decision emphasised the importance of clear contractual terms and the need for both parties to ensure that agreements are fully understood before signing.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established