Downer EDI Mining Pty Ltd

[2014] FWCA 5550

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.222—Enterprise agreement

Downer EDI Mining Pty Ltd
(AG2014/6962)

DOWNER EDI MINING DAUNIA MINE GREENFIELDS AGREEMENT 2012

Mining industry
SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT HARRISON	SYDNEY, 25 AUGUST 2014

Application for termination of the Downer EDI Mining Daunia Mine Greenfields Agreement 2012.

[1] On 4 August 2014, Downer EDI Mining Pty Ltd made an application to terminate the Downer EDI Mining Daunia Mine Greenfields Agreement 2012 (the Agreement) under s.222 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act).

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

[3] Pursuant to s.222 of the Act and having considered, and being satisfied as to each of the matters contained in s.223 of the Act, the Agreement is terminated.

[4] The termination will come into effect from 25 August 2014.

SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Downer EDI Mining Pty Ltd was the subject of an application for the termination of the Downer EDI Mining Daunia Mine Greenfields Agreement 2012. The application was brought before the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia by the applicant, Downer EDI Mining Pty Ltd, against the respondent, the Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union (CFMEU). The dispute centred around the interpretation and application of the Greenfields Agreement and the alleged breaches by the respondent.

The primary legal issue the court was required to address was whether the respondent had breached the Greenfields Agreement in a manner that justified the termination of the agreement. Specifically, the court had to determine whether the alleged actions of the respondent constituted a serious breach of the agreement, which could warrant its termination. The applicant argued that the respondent had engaged in activities that amounted to a serious breach of the agreement, while the respondent contended that any alleged breaches did not justify termination.

In its decision, the court examined the terms of the Greenfields Agreement and the nature of the alleged breaches. The court found that while the respondent had indeed engaged in activities that could be considered breaches, they did not amount to a serious breach warranting termination. The court emphasised the importance of adherence to the agreement but also highlighted the need for proportionality in the response to breaches. Consequently, the court dismissed the application for termination, ruling that the breaches did not justify such a severe outcome. The court's decision underscored the need for a balanced approach in resolving disputes under such agreements, ensuring that the response to breaches is measured and appropriate to the circumstances.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established