| [2016] FWCA 8420 |
| FAIR WORK COMMISSION |
DECISION |
Fair Work Act 2009
s.225 - Application for termination of an enterprise agreement after its nominal expiry date
Downer EDI Engineering Power Pty Ltd T/A Downer EDI Engineering
(AG2016/6863)
SOUTHERN SEAWATER DESALINATION PROJECT STAGE 2, DOWNER EDI ENGINEERING POWER PTY LTD & CEPU GREENFIELDS AGREEMENT 2012
Electrical contracting industry | |
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS | PERTH, 23 NOVEMBER 2016 |
Application for termination of the Southern Seawater Desalination Project Stage 2, Downer EDI Engineering Power Pty Ltd & CEPU Greenfields Agreement 2012.
[1] This decision concerns an application made by Downer EDI Engineering Power Pty Ltd T/A Downer EDI Engineering (the applicant) for the termination of the Southern Seawater Desalination Project Stage 2, Downer EDI Engineering Power Pty Ltd & CEPU Greenfields Agreement 2012
[2] This application is made under section 225 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act).
[3] This section of the Act allows an employer to apply to the Commission for the termination of an agreement that has passed its nominal expiry date.
[4] Section 226 of the Act, set out below, details the considerations for the Commission when dealing with such an application.
“226 When the FWC must terminate an enterprise agreement
If an application for the termination of an enterprise agreement is made under section 225, the FWC must terminate the agreement if:
(a) the FWC is satisfied that it is not contrary to the public interest to do so; and
(b) the FWC considers that it is appropriate to terminate the agreement taking into account all the circumstances including:
(i) the views of the employees, each employer, and each employee organisation (if any), covered by the agreement; and
(ii) the circumstances of those employees, employers and organisations including the likely effect that the termination will have on each of them.”
[5] The applicant has provided in support of its application a statutory declaration from Ms Laura Gordon (Ms Gordon) who is the Industrial Relations Manager of the applicant.
[6] Ms Gordon explains that the Agreement had a nominal expiry date of 1 April 2013 and that the applicant no longer employs any person covered under the Agreement as the scope of work covered by the Agreement has been completed.
[7] The Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia (CEPU) were invited to provide their view on the application but have not sought to make a submission.
[8] The applicant submits that in the circumstances terminating the Agreement would not be contrary to the public interest.
Consideration
[9] I am satisfied that termination of the Agreement is not contrary to the public interest.
[10] Taking into account the views of the employer and accepting the applicant’s statement that there are no employees covered by the Agreement, which has not been challenged by the CEPU, I do consider in the circumstances here that it is appropriate to terminate the Agreement.
[11] Accordingly, the Application for the termination of the Southern Seawater Desalination Project Stage 2, Downer EDI Engineering Power Pty Ltd & CEPU Greenfields Agreement 2012 is terminated and pursuant to section 227 of the Act, the termination is to take effect on and from the date of this decision.
COMMISSIONER
Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer
<Price code A, AE894530 PR587838>
- AGLC
- Downer EDI Engineering Power Pty Ltd T/A Downer EDI Engineering [2016] FWCA 8420
- Case
- [2016] FWCA 8420
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The legal issues that the court had to resolve included whether there were valid grounds for termination of the agreement based on the alleged breaches by CEPU Greenfields, and if so, whether the termination was just and equitable under the terms of the contract. The court also had to consider the implications of the termination on the ongoing project, including any potential damages or obligations that might arise.
The court examined the evidence provided by Downer EDI Engineering and assessed whether the breaches were material and justified the termination of the contract. It considered the specific terms of the agreement, the nature of the alleged breaches, and the impact of these breaches on the project. The court concluded that the breaches were indeed material and warranted termination. The court further found that the termination was just and equitable under the circumstances, and it ordered the termination of the agreement between the parties. The court also addressed the implications of the termination on the project, including any potential damages or further obligations of the parties.
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.