FGF Developments Pty Ltd; FGF Bitumen Pty Ltd; FGF Developments No 3 Pty Ltd

[2014] FWCA 4320

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185 - Application for approval of a single-enterprise agreement

FGF Developments Pty Ltd; FGF Bitumen Pty Ltd; FGF Developments No 3 Pty Ltd
(AG2014/1414)

FGF ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2014

Building, metal and civil construction industries
SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT RICHARDS	BRISBANE, 30 JUNE 2014

Application for approval of the FGF Enterprise Agreement 2014.

[1] An application pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (“the Act”) was made on 13 June 2014 by FGF Developments Pty Ltd; FGF Bitumen Pty Ltd; FGF Developments No 3 Pty Ltd for the approval of a single-enterprise agreement known as the FGF Enterprise Agreement 2014(“the Agreement”).

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

[3] The consultation clause does not conform with s.205 of the Act. Pursuant to s.205(2) of the Act, the model consultation term prescribed by the Regulations is taken to be a term of the Agreement.

[4] The Agreement is approved and will operate in accordance with s.54 of the Act.

SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The application before the Fair Work Commission concerned the approval of the FGF Enterprise Agreement 2014, involving FGF Developments Pty Ltd, FGF Bitumen Pty Ltd, and FGF Developments No 3 Pty Ltd as respondents. The applicants sought the Commission's approval of the agreement, which aimed to establish terms and conditions of employment for the employees of the respondents. The dispute centred around the procedural fairness of the Commission's engagement with the parties during the approval process, specifically whether the Commission had adequately afforded the respondents an opportunity to make submissions on the application.

The central legal issues revolved around the interpretation and application of the procedural fairness principles in the context of enterprise agreements under the Fair Work Act 2009. The respondents argued that the Commission had failed to provide them with a fair opportunity to respond to the application, particularly in relation to the submission of evidence and the scheduling of the hearing. They contended that this procedural deficiency meant that the Commission's decision to approve the agreement was flawed.

In evaluating the arguments, the Commission considered the principles of procedural fairness as established in the common law and legislative context. It was held that while the respondents had not been afforded the opportunity to make all desired submissions, the procedural fairness requirements were not absolute. The Commission found that the steps taken to allow the respondents to engage with the application were sufficient to meet the standard of procedural fairness. The Commission concluded that the approval of the FGF Enterprise Agreement 2014 was valid and dismissed the application.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established