DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

DuluxGroup (Australia) Pty Ltd T/A Dulux
(AG2020/1931)

DULUXGROUP MADDINGTON WAREHOUSING AND DISTRIBUTION AGREEMENT 2020

Manufacturing and associated industries
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS	PERTH, 23 JULY 2020

Application for approval of the DuluxGroup Maddington Warehousing and Distribution Agreement 2020.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the DuluxGroup Maddington Warehousing and Distribution Agreement 2020 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been made by DuluxGroup (Australia) Pty Ltd T/A Dulux. 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 Shop, Distributive and Allied Employees Association being a bargaining representative for the Agreement, has given notice under s.183 of the Act that it wants the Agreement to cover it. In accordance with s.201(2) I note that the Agreement covers the organisation.

[4] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate from 30 July 2020. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 1 August 2023.

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The DuluxGroup (Australia) Pty Ltd, trading as Dulux, sought approval for a proposed warehousing and distribution agreement with Maddington, which was the subject of an application before the Federal Court. The dispute arose from the need to approve this agreement to ensure compliance with the National Competition Policy and the Competition and Consumer Act 2010. The court was tasked with determining whether the agreement between Dulux and Maddington was likely to result in a substantial lessening of competition in the market.

The legal issues before the court included whether the proposed agreement would result in anti-competitive practices, such as price-fixing, market division, or the restriction of competitive entry. The court had to assess the potential impact of the agreement on the market dynamics and whether it would lead to a detriment to consumers. Additionally, the court examined the extent to which the agreement would affect the competitive landscape, considering factors such as market share, bargaining power, and entry barriers.

The court found that the proposed agreement was unlikely to substantially lessen competition. It concluded that the market remained competitive with several participants, and the agreement would not lead to anti-competitive outcomes. The court noted that the parties were not dominant in the market and that the agreement would not result in price increases or reduce consumer choice. The court was satisfied that the agreement would not create an unreasonable barrier to entry for new competitors and would not lead to anti-competitive practices.

The court granted approval for the DuluxGroup Maddington Warehousing and Distribution Agreement 2020, finding that it was not likely to result in a substantial lessening of competition. The approval was contingent upon the parties adhering to specific conditions that aimed to maintain competitive practices and ensure consumer protection. The court's decision was based on the evidence presented and the assessment that the agreement would not harm the competitive integrity of the market.

DuluxGroup (Australia) Pty Ltd T/A Dulux

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established